- Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: MGE UPS Systems
by Adam LaFountain 13 Jul '09

13 Jul '09

> > I'm curious if anyone might know what the future of the MGE line of UPS > systems are. My concern is that they're dead-end since being merged into > APC, and APC wanting to sell me APC stuff. The problem I face is that my > facility was designed with separate equipment spaces, which is great for > normal electrical gear that can be backed against a wall, but not so > great for a product which is designed for the "everything goes in with > your racks" mindset. Any insight would be appreciated. I heard the MGE product set was designed to replace the "typical/old" UPS product sets, like the Silcon Series, and that APC branded units would be concentrated on the "Symmetra" product line. Keep in mind the Symmetras above around 30kva are self contained units that are really racked in the same rack as other equipment.

1 0

H3C Switches/Routers
by Justin Krejci 13 Jul '09

13 Jul '09

Nanog, I was just looking at the H3C 12500 enterprise product for which I received a slideshow presentation on its features and comparisons to Nexus 7018, Foundry/Brocade RX32, Juniper EX8218 and Force10 E1200. It does not look like they have a significant market share but make a lot of bold claims on side-by-side comparisons to comparable products from their competition. Is anyone using H3C products (enterprise or otherwise) here at all? If so, what are your thoughts on them? Are there any noticeable drawbacks? Performance issues? Support? Just an overall summary would be nice. Thanks, Justin Krejci

1 0

3rd Party Router Comparisons and Testing
by Brad Fleming 13 Jul '09

13 Jul '09

Hello all, I was wondering if anyone has a good, trusted, non-partial source for 3rd party testing and/or comparisons of the major routing hardware vendors. I'm willing to pay for a subscription / membership to an organization if the information is well assembled recent. Specifically, I'd like (love) to see a comparison between Juniper MX series, Cisco 6500/7600 series, Brocade XMR/MLX series, and any others that I don't even know about. If your company has recently (say the past 18 months?) completed an analysis and you can provide the results, I can keep them private (this is only for my use, not official decision making). Does anyone happen to have a source they would be willing to pass along? Thanks in advance for any suggestions! -- Brad Fleming Kansas Research and Education Network

1 0

NANOG 47 announcements
by David Meyer 13 Jul '09

13 Jul '09

Folks, A few announcements: (i). Thank everyone again for attending NANOG 46. The NANOG 46 survey is open for one more week. If you haven't taken the survey yet, please see http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=MHjaY6hu6bwNs_2bpmca_2fc_2fQ_3d_3d (ii). Exciting news about NANOG 47 in Dearborn. The NANOG PC has been working with ARIN and the results are an exciting CFP. Please see http://nanog.org/meetings/nanog47/callforpresent.php (iii). Registration is open for NANOG 47. Please see https://nanog.merit.edu/registration. (iv). The NANOG 47 hotel link is up. Please see http://nanog.org/meetings/nanog47/hotel.php (v). NANOG 47 Meeting sponsorships are now being accepted (as always, sponsorship is critical to NANOG's success). Please see http://nanog.org/sponsors. We're looking forward to seeing you all in in Dearborn. Dave (for the NANOG PC)

1 0

OEMs for X2 10G LAN PHY optics
by Duane Waddle 13 Jul '09

13 Jul '09

Hi, I am searching for opinions on OEMs of X2 form factor 10G LAN PHY optics. We've found that most router/switch vendors mark these particular items up significantly just to provide their own sticker/EEPROM ID. As such, we'd prefer if we can to procure from the OEM (or their reseller). Is this a situation where any company who's a signatory to the MSA produces suitable modules, or are there particular OEMs to prefer (or avoid)? If it matters, the prime platform we're looking to plug optics into is the WS-X6708-10G module for a 6500/7600. Thanks in advance --Duane

7 6

BGP Growth projections
by Mark Radabaugh 13 Jul '09

13 Jul '09

I'm looking for new core routers for a small ISP and having a hard time finding something appropriate and reasonably priced. We don't have huge traffic levels (<1Gb) and are mostly running Ethernet interfaces to upstreams rather than legacy interfaces (when did OC3 become legacy?). Lot's of choices for routers that can handle the existing BGP tables - but not so much in small platforms (1-10Gb traffic) if you assume that IPv6 is going to explode the routing table in the next 5 years. The manufacturers still seem to think low traffic routers don't need much memory or CPU. What projections are you using regarding the default free zone over the next 5 years when picking new hardware? -- Mark Radabaugh Amplex 419.837.5015 x21 mark(a)amplex.net

11 13

DDOS Followup
by Charles Wyble 12 Jul '09

12 Jul '09

I had a pleasant chat with tier 2 support and they changed my IP range. All is now well. Thanks to all who replied.

1 0

Point to Point Ethernet
by Andre Oppermann 12 Jul '09

12 Jul '09

A few time already I've wished for a fully standardized and vendor interoperable way of doing a true point to point ethernet link. It would work just like an old leased line or synchronous serial interface and completely do away with ARP, MAC addresses and all that stuff. Obviously no switches in between would be allowed. Each side would run in "promiscuous mode" where every ethernet frame is received and passed up to the network stack (just like on a serial link). Since MAC addresses are useless they can be scrapped and only the ethertype field remains. This increases the effective MTU by 12 bytes. The framing overhead goes away and the packet can directly be directly placed on the wire without taking a detour through L3->L2 lookup and encapsulation step. More importantly one can specify the just the outgoing interface again instead of the next hop: ip route 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 g0/1 Do you think this is useful? Maybe vendors will hear me/us. -- Andre

26 41

cogent contact
by Jamon Camisso 12 Jul '09

12 Jul '09

Could someone from cogent please contact me offlist? status.cogentco.com shows no problems but we're seeing prolonged and high packet losses from multiple locations.

4 4

Re: Can someone from SORBS contact me offlist?
by Al Iverson 12 Jul '09

12 Jul '09

On Jul 11, 4:58 pm, "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patr...(a)ianai.net> wrote: > On Jul 11, 2009, at 5:37 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote: > P.S. Anyone looking to find a good DNSBL, I would recommend Al > Iverson's web page, <http://www.dnsbl.com/>. Hrmmm, AHBL is not > listed there. Al's pretty clueful about such things and checks all > the major BLs in use. Did you ask him not to rate your service? No, neither Brielle nor Andrew (back in the day) have ever asked me to avoid rating AHBL. The fact that I haven't published DNSBL stats about AHBL should not be used as a data point to indicate that there's something wrong with it. I have a strong respect for Brielle and the other folks involved in the SOSDG. If I ran AHBL, there are things I might do differently than they do. But that's okay, that's allowed, and can be said of nearly any BL out there. I haven't personally tested AHBL in a couple of years now, so I can't speak to its current effectiveness level. When I did use it, there was nothing that made me concerned about it, nothing that made me think it would be a bad choice for a BL to use. That being said, allow me to strongly second your recommendation against using SORBS. I think it is very poorly and questionably run, full stop, by somebody who gets too heated and too drawn into personality conflict, and whose ability to effectively stop spam is negatively impacted as a result. Brielle, i certainly respect that you have a right to defend somebody that you consider to be a friend, but please do me a favor and don't discount what I know you have personally observed, and consider what some other folks have gone through when dealing with SORBS. We're not all spammers and cranks and lunatics. Some reasonable people can and do think SORBS is horribly broken. By the way, those of you who disagree with SORBS or are tired of running into false positive or unfair listings, I strongly recommend doing two things: 1. Contact the admin using SORBS to block your mail, and politely ask them to reconsider, based on the false positive and personality conflict issues know about SORBS. 2. Publish a very polite and rant-free page on your website indicating why you think it is a bad idea to use it. Leave angry emotion out of it. Skip the cries of conspiracy theory and extortion and defamation. Very simply relate your experiences and what you know about SORBS. Nothing more, nothing less. You'll be doing a favor for the NEXT admin who runs into the same issue, who will have more reasonable online experiences to link to when explaining to that last SORBS-using admin why it's a poor choice. By the way, I've found this to be a very successful process. In the US, SORBS is not used by any of the top hundred ISPs. It's only in use by small hobby sites and tiny ISPs, and in most cases, the email administrator picked it and other BLs fairly randomly, without giving any consideration to what choices they're making. A reasonable request for reconsideration has a good chance of success. Regards, Al Iverson -- Al Iverson on Spam and Deliverability, see http://www.spamresource.com News, stats, info, and commentary on blacklists: http://www.dnsbl.com My personal website: http://www.aliverson.com -- Chicago, IL, USA

1 0