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

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Jeff Wilde

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

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Lubitz, Jake (MNIT)

+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

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Reid Fishler

Wasn't there JUST a thread on this on Nanog? (what to use for speedtest gear) Reid On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:49 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 > -- Reid Fishler Director Hurricane Electric +1-510-580-4178

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Chris Wopat

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 Shaun Carlson

I was looking at a couple of options for Raspberry Pi, but haven't built anything yet. Have you? s *Shaun Carlson* Director of R&D and Continuous Innovation *ph*: (218) 346.8673 | *em*: shaun.carlson(a)arvig.com *schedule a meeting:* phone call <https://x.ai/calendar/shauncarlson/phone> | video call <https://x.ai/calendar/shauncarlson/video> | meeting <https://x.ai/calendar/shauncarlson/office> *Arvig* | 150 Second Street SW | Perham, MN 56573 | arvig.com On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:37 AM Jeff Wilde <jeff.wilde(a)parkregion.com> wrote: > Have you looked into using a raspberry PI device? > > > > > > *From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *Steve > Howard > *Sent:* Monday, February 25, 2019 9:20 AM > *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > *Subject:* Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server > > > > Our Calix sales guy has told us that they have changed their software to > support servers like ours. > > However, as I understand things, the Calix testing solution only works > with their Gigaspire product. This greatly limits the usefulness of their > product so we developed an in-house solution based on smokeping to do the > testing for us. Not ideal, but, it will get the job done. > > On 02/25/2019 08:11 AM, Frank Bulk wrote: > > I’m not sure how many companies are also interested in this, but if it > could be used by Calix or Vantage Point’s CAF II-based broadband testing > solutions, we would be interested in financially supporting this. > > > > Frank > > > > *From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> > <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *Jay Hanke > *Sent:* Sunday, February 24, 2019 11:13 AM > *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > *Subject:* [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server > > > > Was there any progress on this? > > > > -- > > 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 > > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > ------------------------------ > > 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 Jeff Wilde

Have you looked into using a raspberry PI device? From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Steve Howard Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 9:20 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server Our Calix sales guy has told us that they have changed their software to support servers like ours. However, as I understand things, the Calix testing solution only works with their Gigaspire product. This greatly limits the usefulness of their product so we developed an in-house solution based on smokeping to do the testing for us. Not ideal, but, it will get the job done. On 02/25/2019 08:11 AM, Frank Bulk wrote: I’m not sure how many companies are also interested in this, but if it could be used by Calix or Vantage Point’s CAF II-based broadband testing solutions, we would be interested in financially supporting this. Frank From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET><mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay Hanke Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2019 11:13 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server Was there any progress on this? -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io<mailto:jayhanke@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 ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 ________________________________ 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 Steve Howard

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Steve Howard

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Steve Howard

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Jay Hanke

What would the connection need to look like? Would the route to/from the test server show up in the route servers, require bilateral or new layer2? Jay On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 8:41 AM Steve Howard <showard(a)paulbunyan.net> wrote: > > Yep. We are working with our Washington attorneys to get them to get some > confirmation that MICE is an acceptable location. The rules state the St > Paul "metropolitan area". My belief is that MICE is in the St Paul > metropolitan area, but, we'd like to get some written confirmation to be > safe. > > > > On 02/25/2019 06:59 AM, Dean Bahls wrote: > > Politicians aren’t Internet savvy. So it ends up in the wrong place. * > *sigh** > > > > Dean > > > > > > *From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> > <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *Jay Hanke > *Sent:* Sunday, February 24, 2019 5:34 PM > *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > *Subject:* Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server > > > > Interesting, I wonder how they came up with St Paul (no public IXP). Also > Omaha is missing last I looked, Omaha was larger than KCIX. > > > > If someone implements something in St. Paul. I have some networks looking > for test locations. It might bring more eyeballs to mice. > > > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 5:00 PM Richard Laager <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: > > On 2/24/19 4:43 PM, Jay Hanke wrote: > > Is there a public FCC doc someplace? > > I think this is the one, but I'm really not positive on that. FCC stuff > isn't my area of expertise. > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-18-710A1.pdf > > -- > 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 > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > > > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 25, 2019