February 2019 - mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Re: MICE Amazon Upgrade

by Richard Laager

On 2/26/19 6:55 PM, Jeremy Lumby wrote: > Since it is somewhat out of our control, if you want I can let you know what way it turns out once the new circuits come up. That's probably the best approach. It doesn't matter a lot, but I figure it might be helpful for debugging if we are accurate on that point. -- Richard

Feb. 27, 2019

Re: MICE Amazon Upgrade

by Jeremy Lumby

Since it is somewhat out of our control, if you want I can let you know what way it turns out once the new circuits come up. -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2019 6:01 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Amazon Upgrade On 2/26/19 12:19 PM, Jay Hanke wrote: > Amazon is upgrading their current 2x2x10G configuration to 2x1x100G. > > The new 100G ports are as follows: > > Ethernet3/12/1 > Ethernet4/49/1 > > Amazon will order new cross connects and then cancel the existing 10G > connections at migration. > > All IP addressing will remain the same. Not that it matters too much, but given the way this is present on the Participants list, I'll ask... Which way will the IPs go? Is .111 for Ethernet4/49/1 or Ethernet3/12/1? -- Richard

Feb. 27, 2019

Re: MICE Amazon Upgrade

by Richard Laager

On 2/26/19 12:19 PM, Jay Hanke wrote: > Amazon is upgrading their current 2x2x10G configuration to 2x1x100G. > > The new 100G ports are as follows: > > Ethernet3/12/1 > Ethernet4/49/1 > > Amazon will order new cross connects and then cancel the existing 10G > connections at migration. > > All IP addressing will remain the same. Not that it matters too much, but given the way this is present on the Participants list, I'll ask... Which way will the IPs go? Is .111 for Ethernet4/49/1 or Ethernet3/12/1? -- Richard

Feb. 27, 2019

MICE Amazon Upgrade

by Jay Hanke

Amazon is upgrading their current 2x2x10G configuration to 2x1x100G. The new 100G ports are as follows: Ethernet3/12/1 Ethernet4/49/1 Amazon will order new cross connects and then cancel the existing 10G connections at migration. All IP addressing will remain the same. Thanks! -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 26, 2019

Re: Zayo MICE Remote

by James Urwiller

just got word from zayo that if not completed tomorrow, that significant progress will be made to complete the upgrade. here’s to hoping!!! Sent from my iPhone 7 > On Feb 24, 2019, at 13:46, Jay Hanke <jayhanke(a)southfront.io> wrote: > > Of the affected remote participants, has everyone opened a Zayo ticket? > >> On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 12:50 PM James Urwiller <james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> wrote: >> nothing. :(. >> >> Sent from my iPhone 7 >> >> > On Feb 24, 2019, at 12:39, Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com> wrote: >> > >> > Any update from Zayo or anyone else? The graph last night recorded 20.07 Gbps. >> > >> > Frank >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of James Urwiller >> > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 3:36 PM >> > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >> > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote >> > >> > Well my ticket is now in the hands of design/architecture @ Zayo. Will see >> > if I get any response from them. >> > >> > James Urwiller >> > Network Architect >> > Stealth Broadband >> > james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: James Urwiller <james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> >> > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 11:59 >> > To: 'MICE Discuss' <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> >> > Subject: RE: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote >> > >> > I called and opened a ticket regarding this.. I'll see what kind of mischief >> > I can cause >> > >> > James Urwiller >> > Network Architect >> > Stealth Broadband >> > james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jeremy >> > Lumby >> > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 19:14 >> > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >> > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote >> > >> > Just an FYI: >> > >> > In the event that one of the members in Belle Plaine needs a quick >> > alternate route, I do have transport capacity between Belle Plaine, and my >> > MICE extension switch. I could potentially get you moved as fast as 1-2 >> > business days. >> > >> > >> > Jeremy Lumby >> > Minnesota VoIP >> > 9217 17th Ave S >> > Suite 216 >> > Bloomington, MN 55425 >> > Main: 612-355-7740 x211 >> > Direct: 612-392-6814 >> > EFax: 952-873-7425 >> > jlumby(a)mnvoip.com >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of >> > Richard Laager >> > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 7:04 PM >> > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >> > Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote >> > >> > The 20G backhaul from the Zayo MICE remote in Belle Plaine to the MICE Core >> > Switch has recently exceeded 17G, 18G, and even 19G on the Cacti graphs. >> > >> > I initially reported this to Zayo on January 14th. We preemptively allocated >> > another 10G port on January 17th in an attempt to streamline the upgrade. I >> > asked for a status update on January 24th. Today, I contacted Zayo again >> > stressing the seriousness and urgency of the situation. The upgrade does >> > seem to be moving forward again, but Zayo has not provided an estimate on >> > when the upgrade will be complete. >> > >> > Given that the backhaul hit 19.73G last night, I'm bringing this to the >> > attention of the participants, who may wish to take some action (e.g. >> > shifting traffic). >> > >> > -- >> > Richard >> > > > > -- > Jay Hanke, President > South Front Networks > jayhanke(a)southfront.io > Phone 612-204-0000 > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Feb. 26, 2019

Re: Zayo MICE Remote

by James Urwiller

Update on my Zayo ticket.. LATEST CASE COMMENT *Comments* Hello, Our circuit design team is still working on this and it has already been expedited. Further updates will be shared once they are available. Thanks, Katelin James Urwiller Network Architect Stealth Broadband james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com [image: stealth300] *From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *Jay Hanke *Sent:* Sunday, February 24, 2019 13:47 *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET *Subject:* Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote Of the affected remote participants, has everyone opened a Zayo ticket? On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 12:50 PM James Urwiller < james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> wrote: nothing. :(. Sent from my iPhone 7 > On Feb 24, 2019, at 12:39, Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com> wrote: > > Any update from Zayo or anyone else? The graph last night recorded 20.07 Gbps. > > Frank > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of James Urwiller > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 3:36 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > Well my ticket is now in the hands of design/architecture @ Zayo. Will see > if I get any response from them. > > James Urwiller > Network Architect > Stealth Broadband > james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Urwiller <james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 11:59 > To: 'MICE Discuss' <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> > Subject: RE: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > I called and opened a ticket regarding this.. I'll see what kind of mischief > I can cause > > James Urwiller > Network Architect > Stealth Broadband > james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jeremy > Lumby > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 19:14 > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > Just an FYI: > > In the event that one of the members in Belle Plaine needs a quick > alternate route, I do have transport capacity between Belle Plaine, and my > MICE extension switch. I could potentially get you moved as fast as 1-2 > business days. > > > Jeremy Lumby > Minnesota VoIP > 9217 17th Ave S > Suite 216 > Bloomington, MN 55425 > Main: 612-355-7740 x211 > Direct: 612-392-6814 > EFax: 952-873-7425 > jlumby(a)mnvoip.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of > Richard Laager > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 7:04 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > The 20G backhaul from the Zayo MICE remote in Belle Plaine to the MICE Core > Switch has recently exceeded 17G, 18G, and even 19G on the Cacti graphs. > > I initially reported this to Zayo on January 14th. We preemptively allocated > another 10G port on January 17th in an attempt to streamline the upgrade. I > asked for a status update on January 24th. Today, I contacted Zayo again > stressing the seriousness and urgency of the situation. The upgrade does > seem to be moving forward again, but Zayo has not provided an estimate on > when the upgrade will be complete. > > Given that the backhaul hit 19.73G last night, I'm bringing this to the > attention of the participants, who may wish to take some action (e.g. > shifting traffic). > > -- > Richard > -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000 ------------------------------ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Mike Horwath

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 03:49:55PM +0000, Chris Wopat wrote: > If the goal is something small, one would likely have to go with a real > x86 based thing, perhaps an intel NUC: > > https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/boards-kits/nuc.html Or any Xeon-D system would work - has more ethernets, 10Gbps available as well, very low power. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by steve ulrich

aiui, anchor's are not meant to be used for b/w testing per se and are to be used in conjunction with the atlas probes. the only anchor that i'm aware of that might be MICE attached is at wikstrom. there are however a number of atlas probes in the area. (i host a couple) On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:45 AM Jay Hanke <jayhanke(a)southfront.io> wrote: > I think there is an OpenWRT project floating around for network testing. > That hardware can be had for less than $100. > > There is also the RIPE Atlas project that is worth checking out. It looks > like some MICE members have existing anchors. > > *https://atlas.ripe.net/ <https://atlas.ripe.net/>* > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:33 AM Jeff Wilde <jeff.wilde(a)parkregion.com> > wrote: > >> Wouldn't that be like a $200+ client solution? Seems relatively high is >> the issue or am I looking at it wrong. I know that Vantage Point is pretty >> costly when your talking about 100+ or whatever the number is clients. >> >> >> Jeff >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Lubitz, >> Jake (MNIT) >> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 10:05 AM >> To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server >> >> +1 on the NUC. The Raspi 3B+ USB ports and Ethernet port all share an USB >> 2.0 bus. So at most, you may see up to 300Mbps of throughput on the Raspi. >> I've tried iperf and speedtest-cli on the Raspi and never got over 200Mbps >> on a 1Gbps WAN connection. >> >> Jake >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Chris >> Wopat >> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 9:50 AM >> To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server >> >> On 2/25/19 9:46 AM, Shaun Carlson wrote: >> > I was looking at a couple of options for Raspberry Pi, but haven't >> > built anything yet. Have you? >> >> Pi starting with model 3b+ can link at gigabit, but cannot do anywhere >> near that speed. >> >> If the goal is something small, one would likely have to go with a real >> x86 based thing, perhaps an intel NUC: >> >> >> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.intel.… >> >> >> -- >> Chris Wopat >> Network Engineer, WiscNet >> wopat(a)wiscnet.net 608-210-3965 >> > > > -- > Jay Hanke, President > South Front Networks > jayhanke(a)southfront.io > Phone 612-204-0000 > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > -- steve ulrich (sulrich(a)botwerks.*)

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Corey Hines

I can attest, RPI 3B+ starts dropping around 250-350mbps of sustained throughput. Corey Hines Systems Engineer Arista Networks m 612-209-6550 o 408-547-8075 chines(a)arista.com TAC: support(a)arista.com www.arista.com Arista EOS: A Tale of Opposite Architectures <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hfwr6sY27hA&authuser=1> Download the EOS Configuration Manual <https://www.arista.com/assets/data/docs/Manuals/EOS-4.15.4F-Manual.pdf> Install vEOS-lab for testing & training <https://eos.arista.com/running-veos-on-esxi-5-5/> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:49 AM Chris Wopat <wopat(a)wiscnet.net> wrote: > On 2/25/19 9:46 AM, Shaun Carlson wrote: > > I was looking at a couple of options for Raspberry Pi, but haven't built > > anything yet. Have you? > > Pi starting with model 3b+ can link at gigabit, but cannot do anywhere > near that speed. > > If the goal is something small, one would likely have to go with a real > x86 based thing, perhaps an intel NUC: > > https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/boards-kits/nuc.html > > > -- > Chris Wopat > Network Engineer, WiscNet > wopat(a)wiscnet.net 608-210-3965 >

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Jay Hanke

I think there is an OpenWRT project floating around for network testing. That hardware can be had for less than $100. There is also the RIPE Atlas project that is worth checking out. It looks like some MICE members have existing anchors. *https://atlas.ripe.net/ <https://atlas.ripe.net/>* On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:33 AM Jeff Wilde <jeff.wilde(a)parkregion.com> wrote: > Wouldn't that be like a $200+ client solution? Seems relatively high is > the issue or am I looking at it wrong. I know that Vantage Point is pretty > costly when your talking about 100+ or whatever the number is clients. > > > Jeff > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Lubitz, > Jake (MNIT) > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 10:05 AM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server > > +1 on the NUC. The Raspi 3B+ USB ports and Ethernet port all share an USB > 2.0 bus. So at most, you may see up to 300Mbps of throughput on the Raspi. > I've tried iperf and speedtest-cli on the Raspi and never got over 200Mbps > on a 1Gbps WAN connection. > > Jake > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Chris > Wopat > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 9:50 AM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server > > On 2/25/19 9:46 AM, Shaun Carlson wrote: > > I was looking at a couple of options for Raspberry Pi, but haven't > > built anything yet. Have you? > > Pi starting with model 3b+ can link at gigabit, but cannot do anywhere > near that speed. > > If the goal is something small, one would likely have to go with a real > x86 based thing, perhaps an intel NUC: > > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.intel.… > > > -- > Chris Wopat > Network Engineer, WiscNet > wopat(a)wiscnet.net 608-210-3965 > -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 25, 2019