- Test - lists.nanog.org

What's wrong with provisioning tools?
by David Daley 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

A couple of times during NANOG25, from the floor and from the podium, it was identified that the tools available for managing networks were garbage. I was surprised to hear that even real basics, such as change control and configuration management, weren't widely adopted. There definitely seemed to be an acceptance (and perhaps this is only true at some carriers) that many problems facing providers today are as a result of a dearth of decent tools to configure 'best common practices' into the routers - and as a result of this, the 'problems' with the networks were not with the h/w and/or the protocols they support, but with the people, and their lack of experience and/or ability to properly configure the boxes. A couple of comments that I heard over the last few days: 1) User interfaces are horrible and counter intuitive - I want 'xyz' out of my GUI 2) Systems blindly apply bad configurations to routers - they should be able to do 'some' verification before crashing my network - and can't roll back after they wreck things 3) Change control either doesn't exist, isn't usable, or isn't granular enough 4) There isn't anything to track non sanctioned changes to the network (i.e.: hacker induced re-configurations) I would very much like to hear about "specific" needs for (provisioning) tools that would satisfy your needs - needs that are either being poorly met to today, or not at all. In the hopes of preventing a vendor-bash extravaganza, I would suggest as a point of reference, that the NMS recommendations presented by Avi Freedman during the conference ("Industry/Government Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment: Background and Recommendations". Of the recommendations pertinent to network management, many refer to future-features. As an additional attempt to constraint the discussion, I would recommend that the needs identified be realistic (i.e.: supportable on current equipment, the cost of the solution would be less than the cost of the problem, etc). Cheers, David - David Daley +1.905.922.6560 (global) daley(a)montagueriver.com www.montagueriver.com Montague River Networks Inc.

7 6

Survey: Peering Staffing Levels
by Dwight Ernest 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

Please forgive the non-operational content. I'm interested in getting some idea of the level of staffing provided by NSPs and ISPs in their peering departments. In fact, I've been asked by my management to provide as much info about such levels as possible, without a need to disclose the identity of any responding company. If you have time, and wish to participate, I'd sure appreciate it. I will provide a summary of the responses to respondents. No identifying information need be provided. Get a disposable email account at Hotmail or Yahoo if you'd like to be really anonymous. Any question may be skipped if you wish. I appreciate your assistance! DO NOT RESPOND TO THE LIST! 1. Do your peering staff members do peering negotiations and planning only, or do they also do peering-related hands-on router engineering? ___ planning and negotiation only ___ planning, negotiation, and hands-on router stuff ___ something other than these two choices: ______________________________________________________________ 2. What is the size of your peering staff? ___ full-time staff members ___ part-time staff members 3. Do you feel this staffing level is appropriate? ___ too high ___ just right ___ too low 4. What is the ballpark aggregate exchange volume in megabits/second at peak, for your AS, or for all of the ASses for which you are responsible? ___ mb/s @ peak 5. What is the primary location of the majority of your peering department's staff members? ___ USA ___ North America other than USA ___ Europe ___ Central or Western Asia ___ Eastern or Southeastern Asia ___ Australia/NZ ___ South America ___ Africa 6. Approximately how many private or public peers does your network exchange traffic with? ___ private peers ___ public peers 7. What percentage volume of your network's total exchange volume is exchange via peering (as opposed to being exchanged via transit)? ___% is exchanged via peering Again, thank you very much for your participation. Cheers, --Dwight Ernest

5 4

Re:Survey: Peering Staffing Levels
by Dean S Moran 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

Dwight, Contact Peter Jansen, (peter.jansen(a)cw.net) He is *clearly* "The Man" when it comes to peering, and I'm certain that he'd be more than glad to answer all of your questions. ---------------------------------------------- Original Message From: "Dwight Ernest"<dwight(a)significant.com> Subject: Survey: Peering Staffing Levels Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 15:11:13 -0400 > >Please forgive the non-operational content. > >I'm interested in getting some idea of the level of staffing provided by >NSPs and ISPs in their peering departments. In fact, I've been asked by >my management to provide as much info about such levels as possible, >without a need to disclose the identity of any responding company. > >If you have time, and wish to participate, I'd sure appreciate it. I >will provide a summary of the responses to respondents. No identifying >information need be provided. Get a disposable email account at Hotmail >or Yahoo if you'd like to be really anonymous. Any question may be >skipped if you wish. I appreciate your assistance! > >DO NOT RESPOND TO THE LIST! > >1. Do your peering staff members do peering negotiations and planning >only, or do they also do peering-related hands-on router engineering? > ___ planning and negotiation only > ___ planning, negotiation, and hands-on router stuff > ___ something other than these two choices: > ______________________________________________________________ > >2. What is the size of your peering staff? > ___ full-time staff members > ___ part-time staff members > >3. Do you feel this staffing level is appropriate? > ___ too high > ___ just right > ___ too low > >4. What is the ballpark aggregate exchange volume in megabits/second at >peak, for your AS, or for all of the ASses for which you are responsible? > ___ mb/s @ peak > >5. What is the primary location of the majority of your peering >department's staff members? > ___ USA > ___ North America other than USA > ___ Europe > ___ Central or Western Asia > ___ Eastern or Southeastern Asia > ___ Australia/NZ > ___ South America > ___ Africa > >6. Approximately how many private or public peers does your network >exchange traffic with? > ___ private peers > ___ public peers > >7. What percentage volume of your network's total exchange volume is >exchange via peering (as opposed to being exchanged via transit)? > ___% is exchanged via peering > >Again, thank you very much for your participation. > >Cheers, >--Dwight Ernest > > _____________________________________________ Free email with personality! Over 200 domains! http://www.MyOwnEmail.com

1 0

Error in assignments....?
by Kurt Erik Lindqvist 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

Uhm, from whois.ra.net : route: 209.81.0.0/19 descr: ViaNet Communications 1235 Pear Ave, Suite 107 Mountain View, CA 94043 origin: AS7091 notify: gshaver(a)he.net notify: mleber(a)he.net mnt-by: HE-NOC changed: mleber(a)he.net 19970808 source: RADB route: 209.81.0.0/19 descr: CRL Network Services Box 326 Larkspur CA 94977, USA origin: AS2041 member-of: RS-COMM_NSFNET mnt-by: MAINT-AS2041 changed: nsfnet-admin(a)merit.edu 19990223 source: RADB ??? - kurtis -

13 23

RE: What's wrong with provisioning tools?
by James Smith 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

> -----Original Message----- > From: Daniska Tomas [mailto:tomas@tronet.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 10:37 AM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: RE: What's wrong with provisioning tools? > > i was more interested in something emulating a vt100 that one > could eventually plug to a console port and chat with the box... <plug in voice enabled terminal to router> Router, show config GOOD MORNING DR. FALKEN. WOULD YOU LIKE TO PLAY GLOBAL THERMONUCLEAR BGP? Sorry, I couldn't resist. But should have... James H. Smith II NNCDS NNCSE Professional Services - Network Engineer The Presidio Corporation

2 1

RE: What's wrong with provisioning tools?
by Daniska Tomas 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

bob, i was more interested in something emulating a vt100 that one could eventually plug to a console port and chat with the box... from someone's post sooner in this thread it seemed that someone is using it out there... i like the idea of "talking" with the box while let's say driving a car... e.g. vocollect does something close to this but it's more an in-building solution than an over-the-phone stuff http://www.vocollect.com/sitehtml/products/talkman01.php maybe it would be worth making some mediation to pstn and a proxy app which could ssh the boxes :) -- Tomas Daniska systems engineer Tronet Computer Networks Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia tel: +421 2 58224111, fax: +421 2 58224199 A transistor protected by a fast-acting fuse will protect the fuse by blowing first. > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Bradlee [mailto:Bob@BRADLEE.ORG] > Sent: 13. júna 2002 16:29 > To: Daniska Tomas > Subject: RE: What's wrong with provisioning tools? > > > I have a client HTTP://www.CORRS.ORG using several > speech-synthesis terminals, > they even have a brail printer on the network. > I donate my eyes to them from time to time, but they get > along very well on their own. > > Bob > > > --Original Message Text--- > From: Daniska Tomas > Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 15:15:23 +0200 > > Message by the way - those speech-synthesis terminals were a > just joke or is anyone really using them? :)) >

1 0

RE: What's wrong with provisioning tools?
by Daniska Tomas 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

by the way - those speech-synthesis terminals were a just joke or is anyone really using them? :)) -- Tomas Daniska systems engineer Tronet Computer Networks Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia tel: +421 2 58224111, fax: +421 2 58224199 A transistor protected by a fast-acting fuse will protect the fuse by blowing first. -----Original Message----- From: Mathew Lodge [mailto:mathew@cplane.com] Sent: 12. júna 2002 23:25 To: David Daley; nanog(a)trapdoor.merit.edu Subject: Re: What's wrong with provisioning tools? David, Almost all of what you're talking about is network device configuration file management -- there are several solutions out there today that do this. The rest is template-based configuration provisioning tools, which typically have no operational model of the network -- so it should be no surprise that they generate the wrong configurations. So there are two questions: The first is why aren't operators using even simple config management tools (Is every single one lacking somehow, or is it operational intertia?) The more interesting one, IMHO, concerns operational complexity. It seems that complexity is really what makes it hard to operate an IP network -- even with highly skilled engineers -- and is also the barrier to writing useful network provisioning and configuration software. What abstractions would make it easier to understand the network and hence figure out the right configuration changes to make, so software wouldn't generate config changes that are broken? Regards, Mathew At 01:38 PM 6/12/2002 -0400, David Daley wrote: A couple of times during NANOG25, from the floor and from the podium, it was identified that the tools available for managing networks were garbage. I was surprised to hear that even real basics, such as change control and configuration management, weren't widely adopted. There definitely seemed to be an acceptance (and perhaps this is only true at some carriers) that many problems facing providers today are as a result of a dearth of decent tools to configure 'best common practices' into the routers - and as a result of this, the 'problems' with the networks were not with the h/w and/or the protocols they support, but with the people, and their lack of experience and/or ability to properly configure the boxes. A couple of comments that I heard over the last few days: 1) User interfaces are horrible and counter intuitive - I want 'xyz' out of my GUI 2) Systems blindly apply bad configurations to routers - they should be able to do 'some' verification before crashing my network - and can't roll back after they wreck things 3) Change control either doesn't exist, isn't usable, or isn't granular enough 4) There isn't anything to track non sanctioned changes to the network (i.e.: hacker induced re-configurations) I would very much like to hear about "specific" needs for (provisioning) tools that would satisfy your needs - needs that are either being poorly met to today, or not at all. In the hopes of preventing a vendor-bash extravaganza, I would suggest as a point of reference, that the NMS recommendations presented by Avi Freedman during the conference ("Industry/Government Infrastructure Vulnerability Assessment: Background and Recommendations". Of the recommendations pertinent to network management, many refer to future-features. As an additional attempt to constraint the discussion, I would recommend that the needs identified be realistic (i.e.: supportable on current equipment, the cost of the solution would be less than the cost of the problem, etc). Cheers, David - David Daley +1.905.922.6560 (global) daley(a)montagueriver.com www.montagueriver.com <http://www.montagueriver.com/> Montague River Networks Inc.

1 0

RE: GigEth regenerators
by Daniska Tomas 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

to correct: imcnetworks don't specify, transmode does 3r oeo regeneration -- Tomas Daniska systems engineer Tronet Computer Networks Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia tel: +421 2 58224111, fax: +421 2 58224199 A transistor protected by a fast-acting fuse will protect the fuse by blowing first. > -----Original Message----- > From: Daniska Tomas > Sent: 13. júna 2002 14:30 > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: RE: GigEth regenerators > > > > a brief summary of responses up to now: > > - there are several vendors making some kind of sx-to-zx gbe > converters (they call it gbe extenders), which gives an > equivalent of a device with a zx gbic. these vendors include > jdsu, luxn, extreme etc. > > - two companies were found making gbe optical regenerators - > imcnetworks and transmode > > - other solution is to try with edfa > > > > mikael: which exact gbic did you use? > > i was comparing cisco-reselled gbics and their cwdm gbics > seem to be more than 10dB better on power budget... anybody > tried this in real life? > > > thanks again > > -- > > Tomas Daniska > systems engineer > Tronet Computer Networks > Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia > tel: +421 2 58224111, fax: +421 2 58224199 > > A transistor protected by a fast-acting fuse will protect the > fuse by blowing first. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:swmike@swm.pp.se] > > Sent: 12. júna 2002 17:48 > > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > > Subject: Re: GigEth regenerators > > > > > > > > On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Daniska Tomas wrote: > > > > > but for gigeth in this case - we need to connect two sites > > about 200km > > > apart over dark fiber > > > > Check out the 7020 from Transmode > > <http://www.transmode.se/products/sing_dual.htm> > > > > Btw, my personal best so far is 150km over dark fiber using a > > extra long > > haul GBIC, 32dB loss over the fiber and it worked perfectly. > > Only tested > > it for 10 minutes, but there were no CRC errors during that time. > > > > +4dB output from the GGBIC, now we have to worry to not > look into the > > laser :) > > > > -- > > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike(a)swm.pp.se > > > > >

1 0

Getting a list of RADB objects
by Mike Leber 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

While we are on the subject... Is there a way to get a list of objects registered with your maintainer handle other than web interface? In the past we used the web interface to clean up manually from time to time. We've automated most of the rest of the tasks related to the RADB, I'd like to automate clean up too. We could use LWP, was just wondering if there is a way to do this from the command line. Mike. +------------------- H U R R I C A N E - E L E C T R I C -------------------+ | Mike Leber Direct Internet Connections Voice 510 580 4100 | | Hurricane Electric Web Hosting Colocation Fax 510 580 4151 | | mleber(a)he.net http://www.he.net | +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+

2 1

Off Topic: ISP's in Pakistan?
by Mitchell, Dan 13 Jun '02

13 Jun '02

Hi all, I have a customer that is located in Pakistan and is looking for a reasonably priced connectivity option. He says he currently has a "16kbps (CIR) Frame Relay link to AT&T's global FR cloud" and is paying (gasp!) $1550 per month for it. Their last-mile link is Spread Spectrum radio. He also tells me that 48kbps-CIR means paying (cringe!) $4440/month. I know the NA in "NANOG" does not quite cover Pakistan, but if anyone has a contact over there that might be able to assist, please respond to me privately. Thanks, Dan Dan Mitchell Internet Systems Engineer - Boston AllegianceInternet / Hosting.com 781.478.1857 Direct Line dan.mitchell(a)hosting.com

2 1