- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Re: [Peering-lists] [MICE-DISCUSS] BGP sessions down...

by Frank Bulk

Owen, Thanks - the reason I saw it and fews other did was because I connect through Belle Plaine and some equipment ran into a hiccup there ... talk to Jay offline if you want more details. Frank From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of DeLong, Owen Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 7:59 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] [Peering-lists] [MICE-DISCUSS] BGP sessions down... We were still doing active maintenance on COLOGIX-MSP3 (our clusters connected to MICE), so it may have been a brief outage on our part related to that. Owen On Aug 4, 2016, at 15:09 , Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com<mailto:fbulk@mypremieronline.com>> wrote: Looks like it was 4:52 to 5:02 pm. And it's back up to all but one, which I need to check. Aug 4 16:52:19 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.84 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:23 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.2 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:24 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::51cc:0:1 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:27 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:27 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:2 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:27 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::1b1b:0:1 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:54:56 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.1 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:54:57 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.52 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 17:02:11 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::1b1b:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:11 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:12 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.52 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:12 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::51cc:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:12 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:12 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:2 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:14 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.84 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:16 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.2 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:38 192.168.0.85 BGP: No. of prefix received from BGP Peer 206.108.255.52: exceeds warning limit 90000 Aug 4 17:05:58 192.168.0.85 BGP: No. of prefix received from BGP Peer 206.108.255.52: exceeds warning limit 90000 <image001.png> -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Frank Bulk Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 5:05 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@lists.iphouse.net> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] BGP sessions down... Thanks -- looks like it's down just to Akamai and MICE MRS #2. Since they all share the same physical path, not clear to me how this can be, but I'll start digging. Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 5:01 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] BGP sessions down... On 08/04/2016 04:58 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: > Problem at MICE? Physical link is up. All of my MICE sessions (including both route servers) are up, and I can still ping across the exchange. -- Richard ________________________________ 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…> ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Aug. 9, 2016

Re: route servers - bogon ASN filtering

by Michael Hare

I posted the below on an academic list a week or two ago, figured I'd share it here. -Michael ==/== I'm supportive of Job's bogon ASN filtering in theory but make sure you understand the implications before typing commit. Unlike accepting RFC1918 space, I'd argue that rejecting private ASN is fundamentally a philosophically correct stance that can unfairly penalize those doing the correct thing. Specifically, we observed the deployment of this filter dropping a more specific peering route causing traffic to less preferred peering paths [or potentially, commodity]. Deploying this config could have financial implications for your organization. On 2016/06/08 I looked at this for AS3128 and came to these high level conclusions; * We saw over 400 upstream routes falling into this category, mostly with ASN in the 64512 - 65534 range. * Based on our flow bandwidth stats we chose to reach out to several origin ASN, two fairly well known [tw telecom, edgecast], as a courtesy. One of the Edgecast prefixes we were/are exchanging several hundred Mbps with. Both providers did address the issue once raised. Obviously without ongoing monitoring this or a similar problem could recur without us knowing. * Not present in Job's recommendation, none the less I added a community [3128:60003 for us] when I rejected a route so that I could do a poorman's audit/snapshot of rejected routes over time. A didn't execute a framework to review diffs of routes as they enter/leave this state, but I should [perhaps another use for openBMP]. > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of > Andrew Hoyos > Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2016 2:11 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] route servers - bogon ASN filtering > > Hi all, > > We recently implemented bogon ASN filtering on all transit/peering edges (see > http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2016-June/086078.html) > > There were a few participants we peer with via route servers that had bogon > ASN’s in path for various prefixes which we are now rejecting. > > I’d suggest that we look at adding similar filtering to the route-servers as well, > similar to RFC1918 filters already in place. > > Thoughts? > > — > Andrew Hoyos > Hoyos Consulting LLC > ofc: +1 608 616 9950 > andrew(a)hoyosconsulting.com > http://www.hoyosconsulting.com

Aug. 8, 2016

Re: route servers - bogon ASN filtering

by Anton Kapela

+1 to 'don't blow up the internet' by default at an IX route server. I'd also urge peers to use something like this on their input policy, to match & ignore any route w/ these in its path: permit _(701|1239|3356|1668|174|209|2914|3561|3549|3320|1299|7018|50384|11841)_ Best, -Tk On Sun, Aug 7, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Andrew Hoyos <hoyosa(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > We recently implemented bogon ASN filtering on all transit/peering edges (see http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2016-June/086078.html) > > There were a few participants we peer with via route servers that had bogon ASN’s in path for various prefixes which we are now rejecting. > > I’d suggest that we look at adding similar filtering to the route-servers as well, similar to RFC1918 filters already in place. > > Thoughts? > > — > Andrew Hoyos > Hoyos Consulting LLC > ofc: +1 608 616 9950 > andrew(a)hoyosconsulting.com > http://www.hoyosconsulting.com

Aug. 8, 2016

route servers - bogon ASN filtering

by Andrew Hoyos

Hi all, We recently implemented bogon ASN filtering on all transit/peering edges (see http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2016-June/086078.html) There were a few participants we peer with via route servers that had bogon ASN’s in path for various prefixes which we are now rejecting. I’d suggest that we look at adding similar filtering to the route-servers as well, similar to RFC1918 filters already in place. Thoughts? — Andrew Hoyos Hoyos Consulting LLC ofc: +1 608 616 9950 andrew(a)hoyosconsulting.com http://www.hoyosconsulting.com

Aug. 7, 2016

Re: [Peering-lists] [MICE-DISCUSS] BGP sessions down...

by DeLong, Owen

We were still doing active maintenance on COLOGIX-MSP3 (our clusters connected to MICE), so it may have been a brief outage on our part related to that. Owen On Aug 4, 2016, at 15:09 , Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com<mailto:fbulk@mypremieronline.com>> wrote: Looks like it was 4:52 to 5:02 pm. And it's back up to all but one, which I need to check. Aug 4 16:52:19 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.84 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:23 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.2 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:24 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::51cc:0:1 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:27 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:27 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:2 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:27 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::1b1b:0:1 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:54:56 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.1 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:54:57 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.52 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 17:02:11 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::1b1b:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:11 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:12 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.52 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:12 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::51cc:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:12 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:12 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:2 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:14 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.84 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:16 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.2 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:38 192.168.0.85 BGP: No. of prefix received from BGP Peer 206.108.255.52: exceeds warning limit 90000 Aug 4 17:05:58 192.168.0.85 BGP: No. of prefix received from BGP Peer 206.108.255.52: exceeds warning limit 90000 <image001.png> -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Frank Bulk Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 5:05 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@lists.iphouse.net> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] BGP sessions down... Thanks -- looks like it's down just to Akamai and MICE MRS #2. Since they all share the same physical path, not clear to me how this can be, but I'll start digging. Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 5:01 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] BGP sessions down... On 08/04/2016 04:58 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: > Problem at MICE? Physical link is up. All of my MICE sessions (including both route servers) are up, and I can still ping across the exchange. -- Richard ________________________________ 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…>

Aug. 6, 2016

Re: BGP sessions down...

by Frank Bulk

Looks like it was 4:52 to 5:02 pm. And it's back up to all but one, which I need to check. Aug 4 16:52:19 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.84 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:23 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.2 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:24 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::51cc:0:1 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:27 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:27 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:2 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:52:27 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::1b1b:0:1 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:54:56 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.1 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 16:54:57 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.52 DOWN (Hold Timer Expired) Aug 4 17:02:11 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::1b1b:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:11 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:12 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.52 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:12 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::51cc:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:12 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:12 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:2 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:14 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.84 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:16 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.2 UP (ESTABLISHED) Aug 4 17:02:38 192.168.0.85 BGP: No. of prefix received from BGP Peer 206.108.255.52: exceeds warning limit 90000 Aug 4 17:05:58 192.168.0.85 BGP: No. of prefix received from BGP Peer 206.108.255.52: exceeds warning limit 90000 [cid:image001.png@01D1EE72.E89ADA40] -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Frank Bulk Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 5:05 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] BGP sessions down... Thanks -- looks like it's down just to Akamai and MICE MRS #2. Since they all share the same physical path, not clear to me how this can be, but I'll start digging. Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 5:01 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] BGP sessions down... On 08/04/2016 04:58 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: > Problem at MICE? Physical link is up. All of my MICE sessions (including both route servers) are up, and I can still ping across the exchange. -- Richard

Aug. 4, 2016

Re: BGP sessions down...

by Frank Bulk

Thanks -- looks like it's down just to Akamai and MICE MRS #2. Since they all share the same physical path, not clear to me how this can be, but I'll start digging. Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 5:01 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] BGP sessions down... On 08/04/2016 04:58 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: > Problem at MICE? Physical link is up. All of my MICE sessions (including both route servers) are up, and I can still ping across the exchange. -- Richard

Aug. 4, 2016

Re: BGP sessions down...

by Richard Laager

On 08/04/2016 04:58 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: > Problem at MICE? Physical link is up. All of my MICE sessions (including both route servers) are up, and I can still ping across the exchange. -- Richard

Aug. 4, 2016

BGP sessions down...

by Frank Bulk

Problem at MICE? Physical link is up. Frank -----Original Message----- From: nagios(a)nagios.mtcnet.net [mailto:nagios@nagios.mtcnet.net] Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2016 4:53 PM To: Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com> Subject: PROBLEM: CRITICAL alert for Premiers Spencer-facing Brocade MLXe-4 router/BGP ***** Nagios ***** This is a PROBLEM notice that Premiers Spencer-facing Brocade MLXe-4 router/BGP is CRITICAL Date/Time: Thu Aug 4 16:52:57 CDT 2016 Additional Info: CRITICAL: critical 2, warning 6 Host 192.168.0.85 with interface to BGP peer AS53679-MRS-2.micemn.net [206.108.255.2/AS 53679]: the BGP peer state is in state connect Host 192.168.0.85 with interface to BGP peer AS29040.micemn.net [206.108.255.84/AS 20940]: the BGP peer state is in state connect Host 192.168.0.85 with interface to BGP peer AS53679-MRS-2.micemn.net [206.108.255.2/AS 53679]: the elapsed time the remote peer has been in the Established state or how long since this peer was last in the Established state changed from 39 days, 19 hours, 41 minutes, 12 seconds to 0 seconds Host 192.168.0.85 with interface to BGP peer AS29040.micemn.net [206.108.255.84/AS 20940]: the elapsed time the remote peer has been in the Established state or how long since this peer was last in the Established state changed from 23 days, 4 hours, 33 minutes, 7 seconds to 0 seconds Host 192.168.0.85 with interface to BGP peer AS53679-MRS-2.micemn.net [206.108.255.2/AS 53679]: the number of received route prefixes changed from 1763 to 0 Host 192.168.0.85 with interface to BGP peer AS53679-MRS-2.micemn.net [206.108.255.2/AS 53679]: 0 learned prefixes is less than the specified minimum of 1 Host 192.168.0.85 with interface to BGP peer AS29040.micemn.net [206.108.255.84/AS 20940]: the number of received route prefixes changed from 10 to 0 Host 192.168.0.85 with interface to BGP peer AS29040.micemn.net [206.108.255.84/AS 20940]: 0 learned prefixes is less than the specified minimum of 1 Host 192.168.0.85 with interface to BGP peer AS53679-MRS-2.micemn.net [206.108.255.2/AS 53679]: the number of installed route prefixes changed from 1763 to 0 Host 192.168.0.85 with interface to BGP peer AS29040.micemn.net [206.108.255.84/AS 20940]: the number of installed route prefixes changed from 10 to 0 BGP state of premier.spnc-mlx.fbnt.netins.net [173.215.60.1/AS 18883]: established; prefixes (received/installed): 1/1 BGP state of AS53679-MRS-1.micemn.net [206.108.255.1/AS 53679]: established; prefixes (received/installed): 1769/1769 BGP state of AS53679-MRS-2.micemn.net [206.108.255.2/AS 53679]: connect; prefixes (received/installed): 0/0 BGP state of AS6939.micemn.net [206.108.255.52/AS 6939]: established; prefixes (received/installed): 92186/91624 BGP state of AS29040.micemn.net [206.108.255.84/AS 20940]: connect; prefixes (received/installed): 0/0

Aug. 4, 2016

Re: Please welcome Yahoo to MICE!

by Jason Hanke

Send me the optics and I'll get them installed: Neutral Path Communications Attn: Jay Hanke 3 Civic Center Plaza, STE 204 Mankato, MN 56001 On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Russell Lohr <lohr(a)yahoo-inc.com> wrote: > Jason, > > Zayo will be placing the Xconnect orders on Yahoo's behalf. > > Russell Lohr > Tech Yahoo| Network Eng > 404-422-5932 cell > 701 First Avenue Sunnyvale CA 94089 > lohr(a)yahoo-inc.com > > > ________________________________ > From: Jason Hanke <jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net> > To: Russell Lohr <lohr(a)yahoo-inc.com> > Cc: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)lists.iphouse.net>; Mehmet Akcin > <akcin(a)yahoo-inc.com>; Josh Lepold <josh.lepold(a)zayo.com> > Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 1:52 PM > > Subject: Re: Please welcome Yahoo to MICE! > > Is Yahoo placing the orders for the cross connects in Minneapolis or > is Zayo doing that on behalf of Yahoo? > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Russell Lohr <lohr(a)yahoo-inc.com> wrote: >> Jay, >> >> Sir, in regards to the optics, that you require, where do I need to have >> these optics sent, please advise address and c/o person and we will drop >> ship the optics. Please let me know. >> >> Russell Lohr >> Tech Yahoo| Network Eng >> 404-422-5932 cell >> 701 First Avenue Sunnyvale CA 94089 >> lohr(a)yahoo-inc.com >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Jason Hanke <jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net> >> To: Russell Lohr <lohr(a)yahoo-inc.com> >> Cc: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)lists.iphouse.net>; Mehmet Akcin >> <akcin(a)yahoo-inc.com>; Josh Lepold <josh.lepold(a)zayo.com> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2016 12:41 PM >> Subject: Re: Please welcome Yahoo to MICE! >> >> Juniper part EX-SFP-10GE-LR or compatible >> >> We strongly recommend an optic with DOM. >> >> Thanks! >> >> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Russell Lohr <lohr(a)yahoo-inc.com> wrote: >>> Jason, >>> >>> Hello sir, I have been asked to come back to you and ask what the model# >>> or >>> SKU that you use, I was asked to get this from you so that we know what >>> to >>> provide back to you. Please let me know. >>> >>> Russell Lohr >>> Tech Yahoo| Network Eng >>> 404-422-5932 cell >>> 701 First Avenue Sunnyvale CA 94089 >>> lohr(a)yahoo-inc.com >>> >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: Jason Hanke <jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net> >>> To: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)lists.iphouse.net>; Mehmet Akcin >>> <akcin(a)yahoo-inc.com>; Josh Lepold <josh.lepold(a)zayo.com>; Russell Lohr >>> <lohr(a)yahoo-inc.com> >>> Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2016 7:51 AM >>> Subject: Please welcome Yahoo to MICE! >>> >>> Yahoo will be connecting to two 10G ports with NO LAG Config. >>> >>> Name: Yahoo >>> ASN: 10310 >>> Contact: peering(a)yahoo-inc.com >>> >>> Port: xe-0/2/0 (main switch) >>> IPv4: 206.108.255.58/24 >>> IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:2846::1/64 >>> >>> Port: xe-2/0/5 (main switch) >>> IPv4: 206.108.255.59/24 >>> IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:2846::2/64 >>> >>> Yahoo- >>> >>> This email will serve as your LOA/CFA. Please provide a Juniper >>> compatible SFP+ optic for each of your connections to be installed in >>> the MICE Ethernet switch. >>> >>> Route Server and web server configuration please! >>> >>> Welcome aboard! >>> >>> -- >>> Jay Hanke >>> CTO >>> Neutral Path Communications >>> 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 >>> Mankato, MN 56001 >>> (507) 327-2398 mobile >>> jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net >>> www.neutralpath.net > >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Jay Hanke >> CTO >> Neutral Path Communications >> 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 >> Mankato, MN 56001 >> (507) 327-2398 mobile >> jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net >> www.neutralpath.net >> >> > > > > -- > Jay Hanke > CTO > Neutral Path Communications > 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 > Mankato, MN 56001 > (507) 327-2398 mobile > jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net > www.neutralpath.net > > -- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net

Aug. 3, 2016