Valdis:
Hmm... so if somebody posts to the list with the problem, and somebody else saw that same issue and got a fix from the vendor, they need to send it to the vendor for comment, or they can say "Oh, you're being bit by bug (can't say because it would identify the vendor) in a (vendor model you can't say) several hops upstream from you".
Is this a problem? Not on my team.
talk about Internet core routing in those terms. Sure, all vendors suck, but some suck WAY more than others. I think we all know the names. I would
And how did we learn the names? Let's see.. Cisco, Juniper, Proteon, Bay,
Dude, this is exactly what I'm talking about. You didn't mention my vendor.
add whatever names you want. You probably have your own opinions on what each piece of gear is good at.
I'm pretty much good at any vendor, not great. Some I prefer more than others. I hate wearing my sunglasses to work!
Now, did you actually *buy* and *use* all of that gear yourself?
Friends in the community are my most trusted resource.
Or did you let the common knowledge base called NANOG help you out?
It kept me faithful in a single vendor for awhile. I still kinda like that vendor.
Remember that learning from the mistakes and mishaps of others is a lot cheaper than doing them yourself...
No mistakes to report, sir. NANOG keeps me informed. It is invaluable when used for operations. The Melissa virus, the WTC disaster, business disasters. I didn't mention the names of service providers, but I consider them to be vendors as well. Let's focus on traffic congestion, resource allocation, problems, fixes, reports, and other issues. A vendor that releases an official press release is more than welcome on NANOG. Up to you gues. I'm just aginst opinionated vendor information coming from NANOG. Moderate yourself.
now way more than I ever did about token ring. Wake up. How many routes can vendor X support with IBGP Nailed Routes? What is the convergence time for 100,000 routes? Does vendor Z have wire-speed ACL,s, PBR, MPLS? 10GigE?
Which would you trust for any of these numbers - a salesdroid *saying* a number, or 5 different people on the NANOG list who have all seen a much lower-performance number out in the field?
Must I answer this? I trust myself more than anyone else, that is for sure. I know how to build a network without making too many mistakes, but I always seem to fix them and keep the customer (user) happy. Usually I fix them before they become big. Covey taught me that. I can build a network with any vendor. Just like you. Vendor does NOT MATTER TO ME! If you're posting on NANOG and you don't feel the same, perhaps you'd better unsubscribe. The other option may be to study Ethernet.
How helpful would this list be if vendors had the right to squelch any adverse publicity?
No one said squelch. I don't see squelching on the charter for NANOG. Announce as loud as you want to. Be like other mailing lists and moderate it. Send it to the vendor first. If the vendor doesn't help you, post it. Just like they do with the abuse lists. This is operational. I doubt if you'll ever need to send anything to NANOG. ALL OF THE VENDORS WANT TO HELP YOU THE BEST THAT THEY CAN! Everything else you said (below) makes you look like the mad scientist from my POV. My R&D budget is down 72% from last year. RPR? RUCRAZY? Look forward to seeing you on the battlefield while I chop you to shreds. Not a single ATM project on the map nowadays huh? MPLS is out there, but who needs it 'cept for certain situations sometimes driven by business needs. When I need it, I hope it is over Ethernet. Wouldn't you rather have a reliable, redundant L2 core with isolated failures and fast recovery? Isn't it just a circuit switched verses packet switched argument? Who cares about the digital wrapper! Ethernet is my digital wrapper of choice because of vendor chipsets supporting it and quality product. It meets my requirements today. My real world requirements. There are many examples of Ethernet in the internet core today. I know of many service providers using another vendor besides the two favorites on NANOG. They have reference customers. I am one of them. I've been using them for over 3 years and I have no major complaints. Ethernet: 2 (Mike Lieber did not challenge Ethernet as a technology) Valdis: 1 Bobby
2. Ethernet is the technology.
Excuse me if I chuckle, having heard THAT before in the last 2 decades or so.
I've learned to not take *anybody* seriously when they say something is "THE" anything. Structured programming wasn't the end-all, nor was ATM, nor was Java, nor will XML or Ethernet. Yes, 10G-E will probably see wide deployment. But I'll make a prediction - there will be something else coming out to replace it long before it finishes replacing what's out there now.
(For bonus points, compare the level-1 media characteristics of the original 10mbit-over-thickwire with the 10gig-over-optical, and ask yourself if there's anything in common other than the name. It's amazingly reminiscent of the saying "I don't know what language number-crunchers will use 20 years from now, but it will be called Fortran"....) -- Valdis Kletnieks Computer Systems Senior Engineer Virginia Tech
<< attach3 >>
_________________________________________________________________ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
BM> Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 05:15:02 +0000 BM> From: Bob Martinez BM> Ethernet: 2 BM> Valdis: 1 Define "ethernet". The physical medium? The 802.1q and 802.1p extensions that smell a lot like frame relay? Something that is cheap and widely supported? #define NO_REHASH_OLD_THREADS #include <ethernet-vs-sonet-thread.h> I'm putting my bets on "cool gear" sticking around in the core... however it may be defined. Eddy -- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. - EverQuick Internet Division Bandwidth, consulting, e-commerce, hosting, and network building Phone: +1 (785) 865-5885 Lawrence and [inter]national Phone: +1 (316) 794-8922 Wichita ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT) From: A Trap <blacklist@brics.com> To: blacklist@brics.com Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature. These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT send mail to <blacklist@brics.com>, or you are likely to be blocked.
No one said squelch. I don't see squelching on the charter for NANOG. Announce as loud as you want to. Be like other mailing lists and moderate it. Send it to the vendor first. If the vendor doesn't help you, post it. Just like they do with the abuse lists. This is operational. I doubt if you'll ever need to send anything to NANOG. ALL OF THE VENDORS WANT TO HELP YOU THE BEST THAT THEY CAN!
Wrong. None of the vendors wants to help you what so ever. What they want to do is to have you spend your money with them by claiming that they want to help you.
Wouldn't you rather have a reliable, redundant L2 core with isolated failures and fast recovery?
No. I hate complicated words and complicated concepts. It reminds me NASA spending 10M to invent a pen that writes in 0 gravity instead of using a pencil.
Ethernet is my digital wrapper of choice because of vendor chipsets supporting it and quality product.
Yeah, ethernet over what, carrier pigeons? Alex
Hmm... so if somebody posts to the list with the problem, and somebody else saw that same issue and got a fix from the vendor, they need to send it to
Thus spake "Bob Martinez" <bobmartinezzz@hotmail.com> the
vendor for comment, or they can say "Oh, you're being bit by bug (can't say because it would identify the vendor) in a (vendor model you can't say) several hops upstream from you".
Is this a problem? Not on my team.
When, say, every ISP in the world is bouncing half of its BGP links every time they come up because vendor A's bug aggravates vendor B's bug, it's helpful to know what the problem is. You might have encountered this in your own lab, or magically figured it out before the thousands of others on NANOG seeing the same problem, but odds are you won't. If vendor information is relevant to the discussion, it has merit. Vendor information purely for marketing or bashing is not; this is long established on NANOG and seems to work well.
And how did we learn the names? Let's see.. Cisco, Juniper, Proteon, Bay,
Dude, this is exactly what I'm talking about. You didn't mention my vendor.
Wah. If you choose to use unpopular hardware, that's your choice. Cisco and Juniper account for around 98% of the Internet, so don't pretend you can ignore the implications of that.
Now, did you actually *buy* and *use* all of that gear yourself?
Friends in the community are my most trusted resource.
NANOG is a lot of people's link to the "community".
No mistakes to report, sir. NANOG keeps me informed. It is invaluable when used for operations. The Melissa virus, the WTC disaster, business disasters. I didn't mention the names of service providers, but I consider them to be vendors as well.
That's funny, I remember a *lot* of vendor names being mentioned during the WTC attack and subsequent complications. Maybe not equipment vendors, but certainly service vendors. There was a lot learned there, and if you ignore who was helping who and which vendors did the learning, you're going to be behind the next time it happens.
A vendor that releases an official press release is more than welcome on NANOG. Up to you gues. I'm just aginst opinionated vendor information coming from NANOG. Moderate yourself.
Press releases are marketing, and thus are not appropriate for NANOG. If someone wants to provide on-topic technical input, that should be welcome regardless of which ISP/vendor/etc they work for, or whether they hide their affiliation behind yahoo/hotmail.
I can build a network with any vendor. Just like you. Vendor does NOT MATTER TO ME! If you're posting on NANOG and you don't feel the same, perhaps you'd better unsubscribe.
Do you really think the equipment/circuit/service vendors you choose do not affect how you design your network or the resultant services and availability you deliver to your customers? As Randy says, I encourage all of my competitors to think that way.
The other option may be to study Ethernet.
Ethernet isn't a terribly difficult concept.
Everything else you said (below) makes you look like the mad scientist from my POV. My R&D budget is down 72% from last year. RPR? RUCRAZY? Look forward to seeing you on the battlefield while I chop you to shreds. Not a single ATM project on the map nowadays huh? MPLS is out there, but who needs it 'cept for certain situations sometimes driven by business needs. When I need it, I hope it is over Ethernet.
Ethernet is just another tool in the box. It has its uses, just like T1's, SONET, ATM, and even Token Ring. Perhaps it's more useful today than it was yesterday; we'll undoubtedly have a shiny new toy tomorrow though.
Wouldn't you rather have a reliable, redundant L2 core with isolated failures and fast recovery?
No. You haven't dealt much with STP if you think this is a good idea.
There are many examples of Ethernet in the internet core today.
You'd be hard pressed to find any ISP world-wide that didn't use Ethernet.
I know of many service providers using another vendor besides the two favorites on NANOG.
Just about every ISP uses other vendors. Your point?
Ethernet: 2 (Mike Lieber did not challenge Ethernet as a technology) Valdis: 1
Ethernet is _a_ technology. It's not the only one, and it never will be. S
participants (4)
-
alex＠yuriev.com -
Bob Martinez -
E.B. Dreger -
Stephen Sprunk