Nathan, I have to follow up on this comment you made. I work for an ISP in Indianapolis called IHETS. We have 7 cisco 7500 series routers on our backbone. Wre just spent a chunck of money to upgrade the RAM on them to 64Meg. If yoiu are saying that regular SIMMS work in Cicso routers, then I'll shoot myself in the foot. I'd like to know if you have used this method and how well it works out in the field. Does latency increase with *unqualified* Cisco memory, or is the *unqualified* *qualified* Cisco ram stuff just a big ruse? Thanks for your input.
On Mon, 21 Oct 1996, Alexis Rosen wrote:
alex@relcom.eu.net writes:
and WHY have I to pay 3,500$ for the 32Mb ram if this RAM costs 600$ on the free market???).
Dunno for sure about the 4xxx, but the 7xxx use standard SIMMs, and Cisco has even qualified some manufacturers' parts. Oddly enough, they have also *disqualified* some parts that you'd think were exactly the same. I don't know the details there. The sales types obviously don't like to talk about it, but you really *can* get $12k of 7500 memory for $800. And they'll even agree that it works, if you talk to the right cisco folks.
Yep, it uses standard SIMMs, I have upgraded many of them.
Nathan,
I have to follow up on this comment you made. I work for an ISP in Indianapolis called IHETS. We have 7 cisco 7500 series routers on our backbone. Wre just spent a chunck of money to upgrade the RAM on them to 64Meg. If yoiu are saying that regular SIMMS work in Cicso routers, then I'll shoot myself in the foot. I'd like to know if you have used this method and how well it works out in the field. Does latency increase with *unqualified* Cisco memory, or is the *unqualified* *qualified* Cisco ram stuff just a big ruse? Thanks for your input.
I'd pay attention if they disqualify memory. But we've found that standard x36 16mb 70pin (60ns) simms work fine in 7500s. I suspect it'd either work or not - you won't get added latency... Avi
On Mon, 21 Oct 1996, Avi Freedman wrote:
Nathan,
I have to follow up on this comment you made. I work for an ISP in Indianapolis called IHETS. We have 7 cisco 7500 series routers on our backbone. Wre just spent a chunck of money to upgrade the RAM on them to 64Meg. If yoiu are saying that regular SIMMS work in Cicso routers, then I'll shoot myself in the foot. I'd like to know if you have used this method and how well it works out in the field. Does latency increase with *unqualified* Cisco memory, or is the *unqualified* *qualified* Cisco ram stuff just a big ruse? Thanks for your input.
I'd pay attention if they disqualify memory.
But we've found that standard x36 16mb 70pin (60ns) simms work fine in 7500s. I suspect it'd either work or not - you won't get added latency...
I have used 70ns with no prob, but good to go with 60ns to be safe. Nathan Stratton CEO, NetRail, Inc. Tracking the future today! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Phone (703)524-4800 NetRail, Inc. Fax (703)534-5033 2007 N. 15 St. Suite 5 Email sales@netrail.net Arlington, Va. 22201 WWW http://www.netrail.net/ Access: (703) 524-4802 guest --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Matthew 6:34
Sorry I was not able to make it to NANOG to present, but I wanted to answer one question. Avi Freedman asked what would we do if a airplane crashed into the side of the Atlanta-NAP. The Atlanta-NAP is at 230 Peachtree on the 5th floor. There are two buildings around this building that go up to the 8th floor. If a airplane was to crash in the Atlanta-NAP direction it would not hit our building. If it did hit the other side of the building it may cut MCI metro fiber, but we have MFS and Bell South fiber from two different sides and two different power feed to the 5th floor. Nathan Stratton CEO, NetRail, Inc. Tracking the future today! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Phone (703)524-4800 NetRail, Inc. Fax (703)534-5033 2007 N. 15 St. Suite 5 Email sales@netrail.net Arlington, Va. 22201 WWW http://www.netrail.net/ Access: (703) 524-4802 guest --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Matthew 6:34
Sorry I was not able to make it to NANOG to present, but I wanted to answer one question. Avi Freedman asked what would we do if a airplane crashed into the side of the Atlanta-NAP. The Atlanta-NAP is at 230 Peachtree on the 5th floor. There are two buildings around this building that go up to the 8th floor. If a airplane was to crash in the Atlanta-NAP direction it would not hit our building. If it did hit the other side of the building it may cut MCI metro fiber, but we have MFS and Bell South fiber from two different sides and two different power feed to the 5th floor.
Nathan Stratton CEO, NetRail, Inc. Tracking the future today!
Of course, I was half-joking, but why only one Gigaswitch? Why not two, for redundancy, as is implemented at Pennsauken? With a backup FDDI ring? And I assume, spare power supplies and processors? Avi
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Avi Freedman wrote:
Sorry I was not able to make it to NANOG to present, but I wanted to answer one question. Avi Freedman asked what would we do if a airplane crashed into the side of the Atlanta-NAP. The Atlanta-NAP is at 230 Peachtree on the 5th floor. There are two buildings around this building that go up to the 8th floor. If a airplane was to crash in the Atlanta-NAP direction it would not hit our building. If it did hit the other side of the building it may cut MCI metro fiber, but we have MFS and Bell South fiber from two different sides and two different power feed to the 5th floor.
Of course, I was half-joking, but why only one Gigaswitch? Why not two, for redundancy, as is implemented at Pennsauken?
With a backup FDDI ring? And I assume, spare power supplies and processors?
Well, hay we started with a gigaswitch, MFS starts with only a FDDI ring, or even a catlyst. We do plan to add a second gigaswitch around Jan 1st. We do have spare power supplies and processors yes. Nathan Stratton CEO, NetRail, Inc. Tracking the future today! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Phone (703)524-4800 NetRail, Inc. Fax (703)534-5033 2007 N. 15 St. Suite 5 Email sales@netrail.net Arlington, Va. 22201 WWW http://www.netrail.net/ Access: (703) 524-4802 guest --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Matthew 6:34
Of course, I was half-joking, but why only one Gigaswitch? Why not two, for redundancy, as is implemented at Pennsauken?
With a backup FDDI ring? And I assume, spare power supplies and processors?
Avi
Which begs a question: why use a Giga-switch at all? With the head of line blocking feature/problem and scalability only to full duplex 100 mbps is a Gigaswitch something that should be used in a next generation NAP? I'm not suggesting it's intended to be the next generation NAP, but you'd think that they would want to use the latest switches and technology available, rather than continue down the FDDI road. Darin -- \//// ( o o ) ====================================oOO-(.)-OOo========================== Darin Wayrynen, VP of Technology, (602) 303-9500 ext 3234, darin@good.net
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Darin Wayrynen wrote:
Of course, I was half-joking, but why only one Gigaswitch? Why not two, for redundancy, as is implemented at Pennsauken?
With a backup FDDI ring? And I assume, spare power supplies and processors?
Which begs a question: why use a Giga-switch at all?
With the head of line blocking feature/problem and scalability only to full duplex 100 mbps is a Gigaswitch something that should be used in a next generation NAP?
I'm not suggesting it's intended to be the next generation NAP, but you'd think that they would want to use the latest switches and technology available, rather than continue down the FDDI road.
200 mbps full duplex, and I think it is fine for now. Come on, MAE-NewYork that just opened started with only a 10 meg catlyst. I started with a gigaswitch. No, I don't think the gigaswitch will be in the next generation NAP, but it is a good start. We are looking at other options now for the future. Nathan Stratton CEO, NetRail, Inc. Tracking the future today! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Phone (703)524-4800 NetRail, Inc. Fax (703)534-5033 2007 N. 15 St. Suite 5 Email sales@netrail.net Arlington, Va. 22201 WWW http://www.netrail.net/ Access: (703) 524-4802 guest --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Matthew 6:34
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Darin Wayrynen wrote: |} Which begs a question: why use a Giga-switch at all? |} |} With the head of line blocking feature/problem and scalability only to |} full duplex 100 mbps is a Gigaswitch something that should be used in a |} next generation NAP? Nathan mentioned that MFS has started their new MAEs with a Catalyst or shared FDDI ring. Perhaps that has something to do with inital demand. An example of this is MAE-Houston or MAE-LA, neither of which presently require the bandwidth a Gigaswitch delivers. MFS has been sticking to the plan of adding hardware and/or capacity based on demand and traffic stats. I think the Atlanta NAP, while probably a good idea, won't run into the head of line blocking problem in the extremely near future. Looking at the growth pattern of other exchange points leads me to believe this. |} I'm not suggesting it's intended to be the next generation NAP, but |} you'd think that they would want to use the latest switches and |} technology available, rather than continue down the FDDI road. What else would you suggest? Gigabit Ethernet hasn't been standardized yet, Cisco doesn't make a HIPPI interface, and some people prefer to not use ATM. FDDI has proven to very reliable, etc. Having ISPs continue to grow egress bandwidth has shown to be a bigger problem than the switch fabric at the larger exchange points. -jh-
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Darin Wayrynen wrote:
|} Which begs a question: why use a Giga-switch at all? |} |} With the head of line blocking feature/problem and scalability only to |} full duplex 100 mbps is a Gigaswitch something that should be used in a |} next generation NAP?
Nathan mentioned that MFS has started their new MAEs with a Catalyst or shared FDDI ring. Perhaps that has something to do with inital demand. An example of this is MAE-Houston or MAE-LA, neither of which presently require the bandwidth a Gigaswitch delivers. MFS has been sticking to the plan of adding hardware and/or capacity based on demand and traffic stats.
I really need to start reading responses to posts before posting myself. :-)
I think the Atlanta NAP, while probably a good idea, won't run into the head of line blocking problem in the extremely near future. Looking at the growth pattern of other exchange points leads me to believe this.
That may or may not be true. It's my opinion that an Atlanta based NAP makes much more sense than the existing MAE-LA nap. There isn't a major public NAP in the southeastern part of the United States, and it's quite possible that if done properly, all of the Major NSPs will want to go there for a common place to peer (even taking into account their propensity to move towards private peering). If they go there, I know we will. If you add in the typical 6 month bandwidth doubling trend it leads directly to my second opinion that it's not going to be enough bandwidth next year. The trend is real. If you are using up a FDDI link today, chances are you will be using 4 of them a year from now. Given the above, the amount of traffic could approach 100 Mbps on an outbound link quite rapidly, even for the small, mid size NSPs.
|} I'm not suggesting it's intended to be the next generation NAP, but |} you'd think that they would want to use the latest switches and |} technology available, rather than continue down the FDDI road.
What else would you suggest? Gigabit Ethernet hasn't been standardized yet, Cisco doesn't make a HIPPI interface, and some people prefer to not use ATM. FDDI has proven to very reliable, etc. Having ISPs continue to grow egress bandwidth has shown to be a bigger problem than the switch fabric at the larger exchange points.
Sticking my neck out, I would suggest ATM. It scales better today. Rather than the current trend of running multiple FDDI links to a switch to handle that egress (and ingress) bandwidth, you can use a single 0C3/OC12 link and leave the load balancing across multiple links problems behind. As for reliability, AADS has shown that you can build an ATM based NAP that is reliable. Yes there was a failure the other day, but there have been failures at the FDDI naps also. Darin -- \//// ( o o ) ====================================oOO-(.)-OOo========================== Darin Wayrynen, VP of Technology, (602) 303-9500 ext 3234, darin@good.net
From: "Darin Wayrynen" <darin@good.net>
Of course, I was half-joking, but why only one Gigaswitch? Why not two, for redundancy, as is implemented at Pennsauken?
With a backup FDDI ring? And I assume, spare power supplies and processors?
Which begs a question: why use a Giga-switch at all? With the head of line blocking feature/problem and scalability only to full duplex 100 mbps is a Gigaswitch something that should be used in a next generation NAP? I'm not suggesting it's intended to be the next generation NAP, but you'd think that they would want to use the latest switches and technology available, rather than continue down the FDDI road. I think Nathan is trying to use proven technology that works rather than feeling wind whistling between his toes as they hang over the bleeding edge. ---Rob
Sounds like you are not a pilot. A plane could, and if it did, I suspect they might very well force all power to be turned off and evacuate the building.
crashed into the side of the Atlanta-NAP. The Atlanta-NAP is at 230 Peachtree on the 5th floor. There are two buildings around this building that go up to the 8th floor. If a airplane was to crash in the Atlanta-NAP
I am not a pilot, but I have been a hazmat tech/fire fighter/paramedic. And let me tell you, between CO2 foam, water, and any of the other things they could use to keep a building from going up in that sort of situation, I would be very surprised if even the equipment would stay on much less talk to other pieces of equipment. I can't say I have tried running a Cisco 7513 from the bottom of a pool, but I don't think it is rated for an operational 100% humidity. :) I know it was a joke, but thought I'd throw my $0.02 in. -Deepak. On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Jon Zeeff wrote:
Sounds like you are not a pilot. A plane could, and if it did, I suspect they might very well force all power to be turned off and evacuate the building.
crashed into the side of the Atlanta-NAP. The Atlanta-NAP is at 230 Peachtree on the 5th floor. There are two buildings around this building that go up to the 8th floor. If a airplane was to crash in the Atlanta-NAP
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Deepak Jain wrote:
I know it was a joke, but thought I'd throw my $0.02 in.
The only joke here is that some people think that the Internet exchange in a city the size and importance of Atlanta can be adequately housed on the 5th story of an office building. I could understand it if Atlanta had 20 or 30 exchange points, but when there is only one exchange the city deserves better than a mickey-mouse 5th floor operation. Michael Dillon - ISP & Internet Consulting Memra Software Inc. - Fax: +1-604-546-3049 http://www.memra.com - E-mail: michael@memra.com
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Michael Dillon wrote:
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Deepak Jain wrote:
I know it was a joke, but thought I'd throw my $0.02 in.
The only joke here is that some people think that the Internet exchange in a city the size and importance of Atlanta can be adequately housed on the 5th story of an office building.
I could understand it if Atlanta had 20 or 30 exchange points, but when there is only one exchange the city deserves better than a mickey-mouse 5th floor operation.
Ok, maybe I'm a dullard, but how exactly does the exchange's distance from the ground affect it's useability and/or value to the community? Do electrons travel faster when closer to the ground? Does the speed of light increase? No wonder my 386 on the 11th floor is so slow. Maybe you think they should have leased or purchased a stand-alone facility. Doing so would likely increase the costs passed on to anyone interested in the exchange, and make it less viable for diverse participation from smaller providers with not-so-deep pockets, and from the majors, as they would also be less likely to show if the costs for the exchange were not reasonably low. After all, they can peer privately for much less than it will cost them to peer via a public exchange. Oh and, 20 or 30 exchange points don't make sense in _any_ city. I honestly don't understand your reasoning. Funny, it's not the first time. And, I don't see you stepping up with capitol to finance something other than what you have deemed a "mickey-mouse operation". The very fact that there is no other exchange there (wasn't MAE-South supposed to be in Atlanta?) makes it even more important that NetRail not spend too much money on what hasn't proven to be a necessary service and is not guarunteed to be cost-recoverable. I believe Nathan and Netrail should be applauded for their attempt to fill a void, with what sounds like it's going to be a facility with accomodations on-par with and/or better than any of the other exchanges available today. You and your un-based, non-constructive comments are doing nothing to help the network community move towards the scaleable Internet that you preach for so vehemently. ___ Brian Merritt bmerritt@getnet.net ___ Principal Network Engineer GetNet International
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Michael Dillon wrote:
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Deepak Jain wrote:
I know it was a joke, but thought I'd throw my $0.02 in.
The only joke here is that some people think that the Internet exchange in a city the size and importance of Atlanta can be adequately housed on the 5th story of an office building.
I could understand it if Atlanta had 20 or 30 exchange points, but when there is only one exchange the city deserves better than a mickey-mouse 5th floor operation.
Why not? the Atlanta NAP has 4 times as much space as MAE-East. We are not a mickey-mouse operation. We started with backup everything, and with more hardware then any of MFS NAPs have started with. We started our NAP with gigaswitch, generator, dual fiber entrances, backup power feeds, and more. Most NAPs don't start with this stuff they grow into it. Please don't slam the Atlanta-NAP until you have check us and a few other NAPs out. I think you will see that we are not a mickey-mouse operation. P.S. Have you check out what MAE-Atlanta is starting out with? They have less space then us, will not be up for 6 - 8 more months, will not have a UPS, and will only start with a catlyst.
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Michael Dillon wrote:
The only joke here is that some people think that the Internet exchange in a city the size and importance of Atlanta can be adequately housed on the 5th story of an office building.
I could understand it if Atlanta had 20 or 30 exchange points, but when there is only one exchange the city deserves better than a mickey-mouse 5th floor operation.
If anyone is interested in setting up an alternative Atlanta NAP, I have a very spacious first-floor apartment which I am more than happy to volunteer to the effort. It's even somewhat sunk below ground level, and I think my neighbors wouldn't mind the occassional running of a generator. I've already got 10MB/s, which puts the Northside-Circle-NAP on par with MAE-NY, right? 499 Northside Circle Apt 414 Atlanta, GA Colo space is $49/month for the kitchen, $69 for the living room. In light of the objections raised by Mr. Dillon, upstairs space (aka., "Todd's Bedroom") is cheaper at $29, and the shower can be yours for a mere $19.95 per month! Initial incoming bandwidth is 128k, meaning we're already faster than the orig. NSF backbone! Sign up now, space is very limited. As for geographical diversity, a fellow engineer who lives about a quarter-mile down the road just said he, too, has free rack space with a similar setup. However, since his is a second-floor apartment, he's going to undercut my pricing. Bastard! __ Todd Graham Lewis Linux! Core Engineering Mindspring Enterprises tlewis@mindspring.com (800) 719 4664, x2804
Could we stop this, please? Either Netrail's NAP will be useful or it won't be. It'll be useful as a local exchange if local providers go. It'll be useful as a place to sell transit of transit providers go. It'll be useful as a place to offload huge chunks of Internet traffic between larger providers only if they go, which they don't seem to be interested in yet. Avi
If anyone is interested in setting up an alternative Atlanta NAP, I have a very spacious first-floor apartment which I am more than happy to volunteer to the effort. It's even somewhat sunk below ground level, and I think my neighbors wouldn't mind the occassional running of a generator.
I've already got 10MB/s, which puts the Northside-Circle-NAP on par with MAE-NY, right?
499 Northside Circle Apt 414 Atlanta, GA
Colo space is $49/month for the kitchen, $69 for the living room. In light of the objections raised by Mr. Dillon, upstairs space (aka., "Todd's Bedroom") is cheaper at $29, and the shower can be yours for a mere $19.95 per month!
Initial incoming bandwidth is 128k, meaning we're already faster than the orig. NSF backbone!
Sign up now, space is very limited.
As for geographical diversity, a fellow engineer who lives about a quarter-mile down the road just said he, too, has free rack space with a similar setup. However, since his is a second-floor apartment, he's going to undercut my pricing. Bastard!
__ Todd Graham Lewis Linux! Core Engineering Mindspring Enterprises tlewis@mindspring.com (800) 719 4664, x2804
In our previous episode, Todd Graham Lewis was heard to say:
As for geographical diversity, a fellow engineer who lives about a quarter-mile down the road just said he, too, has free rack space with a similar setup. However, since his is a second-floor apartment, he's going to undercut my pricing. Bastard!
Not only that, but I'll offer free colo space to the first person to locate an SGI Onyx 10000 in my bedroom. Colo space may also be obtained via donation of "cool stuff". The Hartford-Place-NAP will have better connectivity than the Northside-Circle-NAP. We've got a 128k dedicated connection, like the N-C-NAP, but we have the capability to bring up two 28k links to other providers for redundancy. We run a 10mb Ethernet backbone. Cooling for the NAP is provided by a Carrier heat pump, and a conveniently located window. 500 Northside Circle, NW Apt S2 Atlanta, GA. We also guarantee that if we suffer downtime due to an airplane crash that we will refund all fees paid in full. Operators are standing by. Robbie
On Sat, 26 Oct 1996, Jon Zeeff wrote:
Sounds like you are not a pilot. A plane could, and if it did, I suspect they might very well force all power to be turned off and evacuate the building.
Hmm, actually I am working to get a license, and I don't think it would be possible. The space between the buildings is only about 8 ft. If power was turned off that would not be a problem. We have generator, and UPS systems with manual wraparound if say the transfer switch dies. Nathan Stratton CEO, NetRail, Inc. Tracking the future today! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Phone (703)524-4800 NetRail, Inc. Fax (703)534-5033 2007 N. 15 St. Suite 5 Email sales@netrail.net Arlington, Va. 22201 WWW http://www.netrail.net/ Access: (703) 524-4802 guest --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Matthew 6:34
Its a ruse. :) xX36 simms work wonderfully. Just make sure that you get good quality (i.e. Kingston) and that they have tin leads instead of gold... Cherio. On Mon, 21 Oct 1996, Patrick Lynch wrote:
Nathan,
I have to follow up on this comment you made. I work for an ISP in Indianapolis called IHETS. We have 7 cisco 7500 series routers on our backbone. Wre just spent a chunck of money to upgrade the RAM on them to 64Meg. If yoiu are saying that regular SIMMS work in Cicso routers, then I'll shoot myself in the foot. I'd like to know if you have used this method and how well it works out in the field. Does latency increase with *unqualified* Cisco memory, or is the *unqualified* *qualified* Cisco ram stuff just a big ruse? Thanks for your input.
On Mon, 21 Oct 1996, Alexis Rosen wrote:
alex@relcom.eu.net writes:
and WHY have I to pay 3,500$ for the 32Mb ram if this RAM costs 600$ on the free market???).
Dunno for sure about the 4xxx, but the 7xxx use standard SIMMs, and Cisco has even qualified some manufacturers' parts. Oddly enough, they have also *disqualified* some parts that you'd think were exactly the same. I don't know the details there. The sales types obviously don't like to talk about it, but you really *can* get $12k of 7500 memory for $800. And they'll even agree that it works, if you talk to the right cisco folks.
Yep, it uses standard SIMMs, I have upgraded many of them.
participants (13)
-
Avi Freedman -
Brian Merritt -
Darin Wayrynen -
Deepak Jain -
Derek Elder -
jon＠branch.net -
Jonathan Heiliger -
Michael Dillon -
Nathan Stratton -
plynch＠jefferson.ind.net -
Robbie Honerkamp -
Robert E. Seastrom -
Todd Graham Lewis