- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Re: Upcoming MICE Meeting

by Hannigan, Martin

Not conflicting with NANOG or the ICANN meeting would be nice. I’d like to be able to make it for once! :-) > On Sep 3, 2015, at 8:35 AM, Shaun Carlson <shaun.carlson(a)ARVIG.COM> wrote: > > All, > > We will NOT be having a meeting on 9/16 as originally planned. I will send out a new date in a few days. > > Please let me know if there is any preference for or against a specific date in October time frame. > > Thanks! > > s > > Shaun Carlson > Senior Manager of Information Technology | Arvig > ph: (218) 346-8673 | em: shaun.carlson(a)arvig.com <mailto:shaun.carlson@arvig.com> > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.iphouse.net_cgi-2…>

Sept. 3, 2015

Upcoming MICE Meeting

by Shaun Carlson

All, We will NOT be having a meeting on 9/16 as originally planned. I will send out a new date in a few days. Please let me know if there is any preference for or against a specific date in October time frame. Thanks! s *Shaun Carlson*Senior Manager of Information Technology | Arvig ph: (218) 346-8673 | em: shaun.carlson(a)arvig.com

Sept. 3, 2015

Are there any public bwctl servers within MICE?

by Tim Peiffer

Other than the University of Minnesota, are there any unregistered publicly reachable bwctl servers within MICE in specific, or MInnesota in general ? I would like to do speed measurement across CenturyLink DSL, Comcast Cable and a few other residential networks. Tim Peiffer -- Tim Peiffer Network Support Engineer Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota/NorthernLights GigaPOP +1 612 626-7884 (desk)

Sept. 1, 2015

PSA: Level3/TWTC

by Mike Horwath

Nice outage: http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2015-August/078610.html eewps! Affecting people I know and going on 4 hours long. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Aug. 27, 2015

Re: Level3?

by John Unger

Patrick.carroll(a)level3.com 312-805-8830 cell 312-895-8421 desk John -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Bil MacLeslie Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 2:21 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Level3? On 8/26/15 2:14 PM, John Unger wrote: > We also buy Level3 here in Minneapolis and Milwaukee markets. Good > products good support... Can be a bit high priced at times... We buy > through the wholesale group (Chicago) and get better pricing. Let us > know if we can help... > > John John, Do you have a contact in the wholesale group I can reach out to? Bil -- Bil K. MacLeslie | TGWGTD | ipHouse | www.ipHouse.com Office: 612-337-6337 | Direct: 612-337-6206 | Cell: 612-618-1218

Aug. 26, 2015

Re: Level3?

by Bil MacLeslie

On 8/26/15 2:14 PM, John Unger wrote: > We also buy Level3 here in Minneapolis and Milwaukee markets. Good > products good support... Can be a bit high priced at times... We buy > through the wholesale group (Chicago) and get better pricing. Let us > know if we can help... > > John John, Do you have a contact in the wholesale group I can reach out to? Bil -- Bil K. MacLeslie | TGWGTD | ipHouse | www.ipHouse.com Office: 612-337-6337 | Direct: 612-337-6206 | Cell: 612-618-1218

Aug. 26, 2015

Re: Level3?

by John Unger

We also buy Level3 here in Minneapolis and Milwaukee markets. Good products good support... Can be a bit high priced at times... We buy through the wholesale group (Chicago) and get better pricing. Let us know if we can help... John -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Steve Howard Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 11:29 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Level3? Doug, We buy Level3 but will probably phase them out due to cost that is significantly higher than the marketplace. From a technical perspective, they have been an outstanding provider. If you want to send me a few destinations I can do a few traceroutes and send you the results. Steve On 08/19/2015 02:44 PM, Doug McIntyre wrote: > Does anybody buy Level3 transit in the Minneapolis area? > > We're looking for certain paths out of them that have been hotpoints > in the past, so looking to run some traceroutes through their transit > in Minneapolis to a few points. > > Thanks! >

Aug. 26, 2015

Re: Number of prefixes received exceeds limit - HE IPv6 routes via the route servers?

by James Stahr

On 08/20/2015 4:00 PM, David Farmer wrote: > Sorry guys that was us, or one of our participants. > > They made some changes about an hour ago, and announced the whole IPv6 > table to us. We had a prefix list configured, but it seems to be > empty now, not sure how or when that happened. > Ah, that explains it. I found the other missing piece in our configuration and Rob was right about filters. We've got an explicit deny against ^6939_ from the route server because of our bilateral peering with HE and that's keeping our IPv6 routes from the route server down to 45 and 49 routes respectively so setting a limit of 150 is within reason. But the routes you sent wouldn't have matched the filter, hence the prefix limit was exceeded. Everyone else must have a 13K+ limit and therefor didn't notice the additional paths being injected. Or folks haven't put a prefix-limit on their IPv6 neighbors because if this was a full table, that's nearly 23K routes... -James > We're upgrading to ASRs soon, and they have a check for empty prefix > lists. > > On 8/20/15 15:12 , James Stahr wrote: >> Is someone just start re-advertising HE via the route server or did we >> just configure today a session for HE to the route server? It was my >> impression that they only did bilateral peering. >> >> Aug 20 14:04:01.902 CDT: %BGP-4-MAXPFX: Number of prefixes received from >> 2001:504:27::D1AF:0:1 (afi 1) reaches 143, max 150 >> Aug 20 14:04:01.908 CDT: %BGP-3-MAXPFXEXCEED: Number of prefixes >> received from 2001:504:27::D1AF:0:1 (afi 1): 151 exceeds limit 150 >> >> Our session is currently down and will remain down. When the session >> was up, we saw all of the paths start with 6939. >> >> James Stahr >> CDW > >

Aug. 20, 2015

Re: Number of prefixes received exceeds limit - HE IPv6 routes via the route servers?

by David Farmer

Sorry guys that was us, or one of our participants. They made some changes about an hour ago, and announced the whole IPv6 table to us. We had a prefix list configured, but it seems to be empty now, not sure how or when that happened. We're upgrading to ASRs soon, and they have a check for empty prefix lists. On 8/20/15 15:12 , James Stahr wrote: > Is someone just start re-advertising HE via the route server or did we > just configure today a session for HE to the route server? It was my > impression that they only did bilateral peering. > > Aug 20 14:04:01.902 CDT: %BGP-4-MAXPFX: Number of prefixes received from > 2001:504:27::D1AF:0:1 (afi 1) reaches 143, max 150 > Aug 20 14:04:01.908 CDT: %BGP-3-MAXPFXEXCEED: Number of prefixes > received from 2001:504:27::D1AF:0:1 (afi 1): 151 exceeds limit 150 > > Our session is currently down and will remain down. When the session > was up, we saw all of the paths start with 6939. > > James Stahr > CDW -- ================================================ David Farmer Email: farmer(a)umn.edu Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952 ================================================

Aug. 20, 2015

Re: Number of prefixes received exceeds limit - HE IPv6 routes via the route servers?

by Rob Mosher

This is not correct. We only advertise our customer routes to the route servers. We currently send 11764 routes, and have not made any recent changes. -- Rob Mosher Senior Network and Software Engineer Hurricane Electric / AS6939 On 8/20/2015 4:18 PM, Doug McIntyre wrote: > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 03:12:10PM -0500, James Stahr wrote: >> Is someone just start re-advertising HE via the route server or did we just >> configure today a session for HE to the route server? It was my impression >> that they only did bilateral peering. > > HE has always given transit of the IPv6 full table back to the route servers at MICE. > > I had to increase the max prefixes they generated back in Feb of 2013, so this > shouldn't be new.. >

Aug. 20, 2015