- Test - lists.nanog.org

Ciena Help around Atlanta
by Scott Berkman 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

All, If there is anyone good with Ciena Online Metro systems that would be willing to do some contract work around Atlanta, please contact me off list. Thanks! -Scott

1 0

Unicast Flooding
by Brian Shope 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

Recently while running a packet capture I came across some unicast flooding that was happening on my network. One of our core switches didn't have the mac-address for a server, and was flooding all packets destined to that server. It wasn't learning the mac-address because the server was responding to packets out on a different network card on a different switch. The flooding I was seeing wasn't enough to cause any network issues, it was only a few megs, but it was something that I wanted to fix. I've ran into this issue before, and solved it by statically entering the mac-address into the cam tables. I want to avoid this problem in the future, and I'm looking at two different things. The first is preventing it in the first place. Along those lines, I've seen some recommendations on-line about changing the arp and cam timeouts to be the same. However, there seems to be a disagreement on which is better, making the arp timeouts match the cam table timeouts, or vice versa. Also, when talking about this, everyone seems to be only considering routers, but what about the timers on a firewall? I'm worried that I might cause other issues by changing these timers. The second thing I'm considering is monitoring. I'd like to setup something to monitor for any excessive unicast flooding in the future. I understand that a little unicast flooding is normal, as the switch has to do a little bit of flooding to find out where people are. While looking for a way to monitor this, I came across the 'mac-address-table unicast-flood' command on Cisco switches. This looked perfect for what I needed, but apparently it is currently not an option on 6500 switches with Sup720s. Since there doesn't appear to be an option on Cisco that monitors specificaly for unicast floods, I thought that maybe I could setup a server with a network card in promiscuous mode and then keep stats of all packets received that aren't destined for the server and that also aren't legitimate broadcasts or multicasts. The only problem with that is that I don't want to have to completely custom build my own solution. I was hoping that someone may have already created something like this, or that maybe there is a good reporting tool for wireshark or something that could generate the report that I want. Anyone have any suggestions on either prevention/monitoring? Thanks!! -Brian

10 13

Re: spamhaus drop list
by Robert Bonomi 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

> Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 19:49:36 -0400 > From: Bret Clark <bclark(a)spectraaccess.com> > Subject: Re: spamhaus drop list > > John Levine wrote: > > Not that I've ever seen. Nobody else has the breadth of data that > > Spamhaus does. > > > > I've been using it for ages and based on zero complaints, it's never > > blocked anything that any of my users wanted. > > > > R's, > > John > > I have to agree with this...I'm somewhat surprised to see some of the > comments here. Methinks "consider the source", when evaluating the 'meaningfulness' of the comlaints, goes a long way towards clarifying the situation. In -that- light, I'm really not all that 'surprised' at what shook loose from the belfry.

1 0

Re: Wireless bridge
by Patrick Shoemaker 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

Couple of comments: Regarding ISM spectrum sharing: the 2.4 GHZ band (2400-2500 MHz) and the 5.8 GHz (5725-5875 MHz) are certainly shared with ISM devices- microwave ovens, induction heaters, etc. However, the 5.2 and 5.4 GHz unlicensed bands (UNII) are not shared with ISM devices. However, these bands are subject to FCC regulations that mandate radar sensing and avoidance. This means that if your radios detect the signature of a military radar system on their active channel, they will automatically shut down and begin a waiting period before switching to another channel. Mandatory 60 second outage. There are generally three classes of point-to-point high speed unlicensed data radio gear out there today: 1. Wi-fi based gear with some additional hardware and a user interface suitable for point-to-point use. Ubiquiti, Tranzeo, HGA, etc. Pretty self-explanatory. Sub-1000 range. 2. Gear using a wi-fi chipeset (Atheros, Broadcom, etc.) with a proprietary firmware load. Trango, Alvarion, Ligowave, etc. $2000-5000 range. 3. Gear using a custom designed RF interface. Motorola, Dragonwave, etc. Given your requirements, I'd encourage you to look at classes 2 and 3. Getting any decent amount of reliability from vanilla 802.11 equipment is (as you've found) difficult. Gear in categories 2 and 3 from above will generally have a built in spectrum analyzer of some sort that will be able to see interference not caused by 802.11 devices, performance monitoring systems (BER reporting, event logs, etc), SNMP capability, etc. Definitely choose a system with an integrated antenna. You want a directional antenna such as a patch array (panel) integrated with the radio. Messing around with RF cabling, connectors, etc. is not necessary with what you're trying to do. Minimize the potential points of failure. Lightning protection is a concern. Most of this gear is PoE powered, so you'll have a single cat-5 going to the roof. Make sure it's protected with an Ethernet surge suppressor that is properly grounded. Follow the radio manufacturer's recommendations here. Your antenna mount must also be grounded according to NEC requirements. The Motorola PTP400 series radio that was recommended is one of the best unlicensed point to point radios out there. However, it's been EOL'd and replaced by the PTP500. Seems like these are both out of your budget, though. As an alternative, you might consider looking at the Trango TLink45. This radio uses a proprietary firmware and an Atheros WiFi chipset. It has a rudimentary spectrum analyzer, SNMP, ARQ (important), and adaptive rate modulation. It also has a dual-polarity software switchable antenna. This greatly increases your ability to avoid interference. It will run in the 5.3, 5.4, or 5.8 GHz unlicensed bands. They retail at about $4000 for a pair, but Trango routinely runs specials. They were on special for $1700 per pair in April. The WISPA list is a great resource for help with projects like this. Patrick Shoemaker Vector Data Systems LLC shoemakerp(a)vectordatasystems.com office: (301) 358-1690 x36 http://www.vectordatasystems.com > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:13:17 -0400 > From: Curtis Maurand <cmaurand(a)xyonet.com> > Subject: Re: Wireless bridge > To: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon(a)orthanc.ca> > Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org, Peter Boone <NANOG(a)Aquillar.com> > Message-ID: <4A3A75AD.8090508(a)xyonet.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >> > On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 11:54 -0400, Peter Boone wrote: >> > >>> >> Oh I know. Luckily it's located in an industrial area just on the >>> >> outskirts >>> >> of the city. There isn't a lot of other WiFi (in my opinion); 3-5 >>> >> total >>> >> SSIDs spread across 2 of the 3 physical channels (1,6,11) depending on >>> >> which >>> >> rooftop you measure from. >>> >> >> > >> > 2.4 and 5GHz license-free Wifi is license free because the frequencies >> > are shared with the ISM (Industrial/Scientific/Medical) services. In an >> > industrial area, competing WiFi is the least of your worries. These >> > frequencies are also used by industrial grade heating units. Got anyone >> > in the neighbourhood running a large plastic shrink wrap machine, for >> > example? >> > >> > > > Motion sensors also run in the 2.4GHz range. > >> > You can't directly detect these other users with a Wifi transceiver. >> > Depending on the nature of the interference you *might* be able to hear >> > it directly on a scanner (if you can find one that covers those >> > frequencies), but you really need a good spectrum analyzer to tell >> > what's going on. >> > >> > Anyway, don't assume the competition for spectrum is only other Wifi >> > units. >> > >> > --lyndon >> > >> > >> >

1 0

WISP NMS recommendations
by Freddie Sessler 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

Hi Folks,I am looking for recommendations on an NMS system for use in managing a multivendor wireless infrastructure. Specifically we run mostly Motorola point to point, point to multipoint(Canopy platform) and mesh radios devices We have looked at the One Point Wireless Manager but this product in our evaluation doesn't seem to be ready for prime time and also has the limitation of only being able to manage Motorola. Ideally we would have something that could be used for configuration management in a multi vendor environment as well as recieve SNMP traps about RF issues such as latency and jitter. I am curious to what other shops are using out there. If this is a top better suited to another list, my apologies and any pointers to a different list would be greatly appreciated. Thanks JT

5 4

Re: NANOG Digest, Vol 17, Issue 51
by Chris Ledford 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

Cisco aironet ...reliable and the ony way to go ... Chris ledford CCNA CCSP CWLSS ------Original Message------ From: nanog-request(a)nanog.org To: nanog(a)nanog.org ReplyTo: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: NANOG Digest, Vol 17, Issue 51 Sent: Jun 18, 2009 9:23 AM Send NANOG mailing list submissions to nanog(a)nanog.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to nanog-request(a)nanog.org You can reach the person managing the list at nanog-owner(a)nanog.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of NANOG digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Wireless bridge (Peter Boone) 2. Re: Wireless bridge (Jared Mauch) 3. Re: WISP NMS recommendations (Patrick Shoemaker) 4. Re: Wireless bridge (Joe Tyson) 5. Re: Wireless bridge (Chuck Anderson) 6. Re: Wireless bridge (Roy) 7. Re: Wireless bridge (Curtis Maurand) 8. Re: Wireless bridge (Joel Jaeggli) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:05:56 -0400 From: "Peter Boone" <NANOG(a)Aquillar.com> Subject: Wireless bridge To: <nanog(a)nanog.org> Message-ID: <005c01c9f015$852ae490$8f80adb0$@com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi NANOG, I'm looking for some equipment recommendations for a wireless bridge between two locations approximately 500-800 meters apart. The current setup for this company has been extremely unstable and slow. I don't have a lot of experience in this area so I was hoping someone could give me a few pointers. Currently, both locations are using Linksys WRT54GL's flashed with DD-WRT firmware (Yes, 802.11g. All extra bells and whistles are disabled in the firmware. They were set up for WDS so other wireless clients could connect to the same access point, with varying degrees of success. Not very important). They are connected to SmartAnt 2300-2500 MHz 14 dBi directional antenna mounted on the roof (extended pretty high for perfect line of sight). I'm not sure when they got these antenna exactly but I'm told it was when WiFi was very new. The network is very small so both locations share the same subnet (192.168.1.0/24). They have gone through numerous Linksys access points over the years. The wireless settings are tweaked as best as possible, and we have found the connection to be most stable when the TX is limited to 6-9 Mbps. We have explored other options as well. An internet connection at each location + VPN is out due to very slow upstream speeds (the buildings are in an industrial area, ADSL is the only option.) The max they offer on regular business accounts is 800 kbps up. T1 lines are even slower and even more expensive. They won't offer us any other solutions such as fibre. We have considered running fibre/coax but there is too much construction activity and other property in the way. I'm looking into RouterBOARD right now, considering a RB433AH and R52H wireless card, but I'm not sure this will actually solve the problem. It's difficult to determine if the issue is with the antennas or access points (for example, after a good thunderstorm, the wireless link will be down for at least 12 hours, but will fix itself eventually. Resetting either access point will keep the link down for at least 30 minutes. Using an airgun on the access points tends to make them more reliable, even if they are clean and dust free. From the admin interface, each access point will report seeing a very good and strong signal from the other, yet they refuse to communicate until they feel like it a few hours later.) Any suggestions welcome. I'm sure you can tell cost is a bit of a factor here but it will be easy for me to justify a higher price if I'm confident it will be effective. While I'm at it, I've been reading along on the list for over a year now; thanks everyone for sharing your real world experiences :) Peter ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:18:24 -0400 From: Jared Mauch <jared(a)puck.nether.net> Subject: Re: Wireless bridge To: Peter Boone <NANOG(a)Aquillar.com> Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org Message-ID: <20090618131824.GA25957(a)puck.nether.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 09:05:56AM -0400, Peter Boone wrote: > Hi NANOG, > > I'm looking for some equipment recommendations for a wireless bridge between > two locations approximately 500-800 meters apart. The current setup for this > company has been extremely unstable and slow. I don't have a lot of > experience in this area so I was hoping someone could give me a few > pointers. I've had good luck with Cisco Aironet gear running in repeater mode. I've done the cheap linksys thing as well and it just did not work as well as using some equipment that was better designed. I have actually found the non-IOS software on the aironet 350/340 to be more usable than the IOS software. You need to have your network be consistent. You also have the obvious interference challenges with any unlicensed deployment. - Jared some of the equipment i've used: http://cgi.ebay.com/5-Cisco-Aironet-350-WAPs-AP352E2R-A-K9_W0QQitemZ2003516… http://cgi.ebay.com/Cisco-AIR-AP1121G-A-K9-Aironet-1100-1121-Access-Point_W… -- Jared Mauch | pgp key available via finger from jared(a)puck.nether.net clue++; | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/ My statements are only mine. ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:21:56 -0400 From: Patrick Shoemaker <shoemakerp(a)vectordatasystems.com> Subject: Re: WISP NMS recommendations To: nanog(a)nanog.org Message-ID: <4A3A3F74.6060601(a)vectordatasystems.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Although this would probably be better suited for one of the WISPA lists, I'll respond here anyhow since there seems to be some interest. For managing Canopy elements, Motorola Prizm is probably the way to go. First of all, you'll need it to handle element authentication for your PtMP system. It will also do configuration management, alerting, and all the usual NMS stuff. It's also *possible* to get it to work with other SNMP capable devices if you want to manage other vendors' equipment. It will work out of the box with the Canopy PtMP line, PtP devices, powerline carrier devices, and (I think) the MotoMESH line. It gives you all the info you need at a glance for each element: configuration history, RF power level plots, bandwidth utilization plots, alert history, etc. FYI if you haven't used it, Prizm is a pretty clunky and slow Java-based package. The features are nice, but configuring it can be a chore. Patrick Shoemaker Vector Data Systems LLC shoemakerp(a)vectordatasystems.com office: (301) 358-1690 x36 http://www.vectordatasystems.com nanog-request(a)nanog.org wrote: > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:31:29 -0700 > From: Freddie Sessler <nanogger(a)gmail.com> > Subject: WISP NMS recommendations > To: nanog(a)nanog.org > Message-ID: > <d0f4f2f20906172131i5f86c80ds993a943c4f0ddf4f(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hi Folks,I am looking for recommendations on an NMS system for use in > managing a multivendor ------Original Message Truncated------

1 0

Telephones for Noisy Data Centers
by Rick 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

The ones I can recommend in that line are the headsets from David Clark. I've used these for decades in some of the harshest noise locations with great success. While most of the adaptors I use are home made I suspect that they can supply one for about any application. They have for me. http://www.davidclark.com/ regards Rick Try noice-canceling aviation headsets (GA or helicopter models have truly amazing noise suppression). High-end models come with cellphone interface. I don't think cellphones will work in many data centers, but I think rigging interface from a normal cordless phone to the headset is pretty simple. The better of these headsets (Bose X, Sennheiser HMC460, Zulu Lightspeed, etc) have additional digital signal processing for getting voice out of noise - if you don't mind expense:) --vadim > Michael J McCafferty wrote: > > All, > > I'd be OK if we were in a facility that was only average in terms of > > noise, but we are not. I need an exceptional phone for the data center. > > Something that doesn't transmit the horrible background noise to the > > other end, and something that is loud without being painful for the user > > of this phone. Cordless would be very fine, headset is excellent. > > Ordinary desk phone is OK... but the most important thing is that it > > works for clear communication. A loud ringer would great too... but if > > the best phone doesn't have one, I'll get an auxiliary ringer. > > > > Does anyone have a phone model that they find to be excellent in a > > louder than usual data center?

1 0

Cogent input
by Justin Shore 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

I'm in search of some information about Cogent, it's past, present and future. I've heard bits and pieces about Cogent's past over the years but by no means have I actively been keeping up. I'm aware of some (regular?) depeering issues. The NANOG archives have given me some additional insight into that (recurring?) problem. The reasoning behind the depeering events is a bit fuzzy though. I would be interested in people's opinion on whether or not they should be consider for upstream service based on this particular issue. Are there any reasonable mitigation measures available to Cogent downstreams if (when?) Cogent were to be depeered again? My understanding is that at least on previous depeering occasion, the depeering partner simply null-routed all prefixes being received via Cogent, creating a blackhole essentially. I also recall reading that this meant that prefixes being advertised and received by the depeering partner from other peers would still end up in the blackhole. The only solution I would see to this problem would be to shut down the BGP session with Cogent and rely on a 2nd upstream. Are there any other possible steps for mitigation in a depeering event? I also know that their bandwidth is extremely cheap. This of course creates an issue for technical folks when trying to justify other upstream options that cost significantly more but also don't have a damaging history of getting depeered. Does Cogent still have an issue with depeering? Are there any reasonable mitigation measures or should a downstream customer do any thing in particular to ready themselves for a depeering event? Does their low cost outweigh the risks? What are the specific risks? Thanks Justin

44 61

Re: WISP NMS recommendations
by Patrick Shoemaker 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

Although this would probably be better suited for one of the WISPA lists, I'll respond here anyhow since there seems to be some interest. For managing Canopy elements, Motorola Prizm is probably the way to go. First of all, you'll need it to handle element authentication for your PtMP system. It will also do configuration management, alerting, and all the usual NMS stuff. It's also *possible* to get it to work with other SNMP capable devices if you want to manage other vendors' equipment. It will work out of the box with the Canopy PtMP line, PtP devices, powerline carrier devices, and (I think) the MotoMESH line. It gives you all the info you need at a glance for each element: configuration history, RF power level plots, bandwidth utilization plots, alert history, etc. FYI if you haven't used it, Prizm is a pretty clunky and slow Java-based package. The features are nice, but configuring it can be a chore. Patrick Shoemaker Vector Data Systems LLC shoemakerp(a)vectordatasystems.com office: (301) 358-1690 x36 http://www.vectordatasystems.com nanog-request(a)nanog.org wrote: > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:31:29 -0700 > From: Freddie Sessler <nanogger(a)gmail.com> > Subject: WISP NMS recommendations > To: nanog(a)nanog.org > Message-ID: > <d0f4f2f20906172131i5f86c80ds993a943c4f0ddf4f(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hi Folks,I am looking for recommendations on an NMS system for use in > managing a multivendor wireless infrastructure. Specifically we run mostly > Motorola point to point, point to multipoint(Canopy platform) and mesh > radios devices We have looked at the One Point Wireless Manager but this > product in our evaluation doesn't seem to be ready for prime time and also > has the limitation of only being able to manage Motorola. Ideally we would > have something that could be used for configuration management in a multi > vendor environment as well as recieve SNMP traps about RF issues such as > latency and jitter. I am curious to what other shops are using out there. If > this is a top better suited to another list, my apologies and any pointers > to a different list would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks > JT

1 0

RE: spamhaus drop list
by Quinn Mahoney 18 Jun '09

18 Jun '09

Is there a competing droplist, that can be compared against Spamhaus's droplist? That seems like an extraordinary claim, so I'm not satisfied with the evidence provided. Is this not the best droplist? -----Original Message----- From: Dean Anderson [mailto:dean@av8.com] Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 6:10 PM To: Quinn Mahoney Cc: nanog(a)nanog.org Subject: Re: spamhaus drop list I suggest you avoid spamhaus, MAPS, and SORBS. They are really spammers in disguise, using blacklists to harm their competition while presumably letting their own spam through. We know they have used trust of the anti-spam community to list-wash spam-trap addresses. See http://www.iadl.org/whitehat/whitehat-story.html add the IADL pages on Paul Vixie and MAPS. You might also look at http://www.av8.net/IETF-watch/People/JohnLevine/index.html Levine, long head of the Anti-spam Research Group, was also unmasked as a spammer. Fred Baker <fred(a)cisco.com> is on the ISC Board of Trustees, and is a Vixie supportor. --Dean On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Quinn Mahoney wrote: > I'm looking to implement the Spamhaus drop list. > http://www.spamhaus.org/drop/index.lasso > > > > On their FAQ they have a script that looks like it grabs the lists text > file and connects to a given router, and tells you what has changed in > the list, and what your router is null routing. I'm not sure if it then > removes the null routes if a list entry has been removed. I haven't > found much documentation on the net regarding this. In the future it > looks like you will be able to peer with them and null route traffic > from a private AS, which will be routes from the drop list. Right now > though, it looks like you'd have to update an ACL manually for any > changes to the list. Or use this script which null routes the traffic > (I guess it's not a big deal getting the syn packets, as long as the > mail won't send because of the null route). I am not sure if this > script updates the null routes automatically, or how to use it, I can't > find to much documentation. > > > > Any documentation on this script or another script available. What are > your suggestions? > > > > thanks > > > > > > > -- Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service? www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service 617 344 9000

8 9