- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Andrew Hoyos

> On Oct 28, 2016, at 10:30 AM, Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> wrote: > >> I have to assume that regardless they are expensive. > > Actually, I think the QFX5200-32C is pretty reasonable price, and I think one > to shoot for, although watch out pricing it as hardware & software are seperate > line items. But in some ways, that is good, as this application doesn't need > VxLAN and EVPN or all the fancy new things. QFX5100-48 can be had for 48 port 10g density as well for like $6k NFR with the right Juniper partner (hint hint). Depending on direction the group wants to go as far as a new fabric and timing, I may even have one we would be willing to donate to the cause. -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Doug McIntyre

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 09:53:02AM -0500, Mike Horwath wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 02:07:39PM -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote: > > The QFX5200-32C can get into newer technologies like adding 25G/50G > > and 100G capable ports. Again using breakout cables to breakout ports > > into the "slower" speeds we are running, and can get into the range of > > 128 x 10GB ports with breakout cables in 1U. .. > I have to assume that regardless they are expensive. Actually, I think the QFX5200-32C is pretty reasonable price, and I think one to shoot for, although watch out pricing it as hardware & software are seperate line items. But in some ways, that is good, as this application doesn't need VxLAN and EVPN or all the fancy new things. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Mike Horwath

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 09:57:19AM -0500, Richard Laager wrote: > There may be a need to have one list for people with actual access > to the equipment and a separate list for another set of users. But > before we go there, I need to have more discussions with people who > might be on those lists. Oh that idea was bandied about back in month-one of MICE. Once you have an idea just reach out to me. I maintain the MICE-* lists still (and Doug recently helped with something that had been missed. ewps) -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Richard Laager

On 10/28/2016 09:45 AM, Mike Horwath wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 01:56:32PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote: >> 3) asking for a MICE-TECH and/or MICE-OPS list be created (depending >> on whether we have distinct groups and what those people want). I >> expect at least one list will be closed to members only. > > Give the word and it can be done. > > Hell both could be done though they seem a little redundant in naming. :) There may be a need to have one list for people with actual access to the equipment and a separate list for another set of users. But before we go there, I need to have more discussions with people who might be on those lists. -- Richard

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Mike Horwath

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 09:45:00AM -0500, Jeremy Lumby wrote: > I do believe the result of that discussion is that we will not offer > service level agreements, and that whenever a new member agreement > was drafted, it would essentially say that we cannot guarantee > uptime, or resolution response time, and the solution would be that > the member would responsible to disconnect themselves if > quality/reliability issues arose that the member found unacceptable. That's also just fine. You can have some defined parameters about scheduled work (time, announcements, etc) yet still skip an SLA. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Mike Horwath

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 02:07:39PM -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 08:21:54AM -0500, Mike Horwath wrote: > > > EX4550 is 32 ports base, 48 ports with addon cards. > > It is 32 + 8 ports if you want to use the back expansion slot to house > a VC card instead. The 4550 doesn't have built-in VC (unlike the 4200/4500) > (technically the VC card is slotted into the 4500, but I've never seen one > bought without it there). So the EX4500 can do more ports than a EX4550. Ooh I didn't know that! Thanks! > The QFX5200-32C can get into newer technologies like adding 25G/50G > and 100G capable ports. Again using breakout cables to breakout ports > into the "slower" speeds we are running, and can get into the range of > 128 x 10GB ports with breakout cables in 1U. > > The QFX10002-36Q is much like the above, and can get into 144 x 10G > ports with breakout cables, but I know the price on this switch pushes > now into 6 figures. I have to assume that regardless they are expensive. If only that non-profit thing were in place *today*. A lot of work and I don't envy anyone having to do it. But I, and I don't think I am alone, am not donating money until there is a formal organization wrapped up in pretty bows. I have faith, though. This is coming and there will be much celebration. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Mike Horwath

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 01:56:32PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote: > 3) asking for a MICE-TECH and/or MICE-OPS list be created (depending > on whether we have distinct groups and what those people want). I > expect at least one list will be closed to members only. Give the word and it can be done. Hell both could be done though they seem a little redundant in naming. :) -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Jeremy Lumby

I do believe the result of that discussion is that we will not offer service level agreements, and that whenever a new member agreement was drafted, it would essentially say that we cannot guarantee uptime, or resolution response time, and the solution would be that the member would responsible to disconnect themselves if quality/reliability issues arose that the member found unacceptable. -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Mike Horwath Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 9:40 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 09:58:06AM -0500, Colin Baker wrote: > I remember some discussion in a MICE UG meeting a few years back that > some larger networks may have strict requirements that must be met in > order to connect to the exchange. We've added some big content > providers recently, which I'm thrilled to see, but I think establishing > some defined and documented standards can only help continue the growth. Confirm and agree. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Mike Horwath

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:10:00AM -0500, Jeremy Lumby wrote: > I agree standards would help, however I know that my personal > donations to MICE would probably have been far less if I was forced > to do it on a corporate standard schedule, and lets remember > donations like that got us here, and I would prefer not to lose > donors over standards, and I do not feel membership will be impacted > because of lack of standards since all of our current members have > gotten along quite well all this time without them. These aren't corporate standard schedules. While I am now on the outside of the service provider world, and no longer a direct member of MICE in any capacity (mailing list doens't count), I do feel that we should have something defined and adhered to for the benefit of the group as a whole. We didn't get here all willy nilly, using 1994 ISP style operations. Should there be defined announcement windows for scheduled maintenance? I think most everyone would agree that would be a yes. Should there be notifications of unscheduled outages, maintenance, lunch changes? Yes but this would be looser for timeframes. In the heat of the moment would you rather see work done to further forward the repair or would you like notifications every 15 minutes that things are still broken? Tough stuff.. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Mike Horwath

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 09:58:06AM -0500, Colin Baker wrote: > I remember some discussion in a MICE UG meeting a few years back that > some larger networks may have strict requirements that must be met in > order to connect to the exchange. We've added some big content > providers recently, which I'm thrilled to see, but I think establishing > some defined and documented standards can only help continue the growth. Confirm and agree. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Oct. 28, 2016