- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Re: Jumbo Frames

by Jonathan Stewart

Hey Jamison, The consensus view is this: 1500 Bytes is the MTU of the internet, and MTU1500 has so much inertia that you or me or all this mailing list together could not change it. The sages also tell us that PMTUd--path MTU discovery--does not work with any reliability and thus does not work in reality. Things like NAT, firewalls and deep packet inspectors routinely break ICMP of all kinds. Most crushingly for an IX: there's no such thing as layer-2 MTU discovery. In the same L2 domain, all routers need to use the same MTU, or stuff will break (Jeremy pointed to one example of failing BGP message exchange). If I set my router to MTU1500, and you set yours to MTU9000, how would we ever know? This is a misconfiguration, so what could coordinate those values on an IX? Thus, we should all use MTU 1500. We could have a separate VLAN that's MTU 9000 where all the routers connected would set their interface to MTU 9000. The routers wouldn't have any MTU breakage over that L2 domain. SIX does this, and it seems the best and most rational way to allow MTU 9000 for those who want it. Finally, views do differ, i'm sure others have opinions that do not match mine. Cheers, Jonathan Jonathan Stewart Network Engineer LES.NET - AS18451 Desk: 1-204-666-6191 Mobile: 1-204-990-2120 130 Portage Avenue E Winnipeg, MB R3C 0A1 CANADA On Fri., 2021-06-18 1:09 p.m., Jamison Masters wrote: > > Hi all, > > We are migrating our connections to 10G, and I’m wondering if I should > request jumbo frames. > > I’m trying for due diligence, and apologize if this is a rudimentary > question. Nanog searches do not have clear recommendations, or maybe > I did not search enough. > > My experience with jumbo frames indicates to me that I should be safe > with 9000 byte frames, but there could be PMTU discovery and > fragmentation issues during transit or on the receiving side. > > Would you or would you not enable 9K frames with IXP and ISP > connections? I just do not have enough experience in this regard, so > I am thankful for any thoughts here. > > My inclination is to go with 9K frames, yet I do not want to deal with > ancillary issues that I cannot anticipate, discern, or troubleshoot – > especially during a cut. > > Any experience from the group is appreciated. > > Thank you, > > Jamison Masters > > Verus Corporation > > jamison(a)veruscorp.com <mailto:jamison@veruscorp.com> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > <http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1> >

June 18, 2021

Re: Jumbo Frames

by Jeremy Lumby

The biggest thing I have run across is on an IX where everyone may be running a different MTU if you just set yours to 9K then your router will utilize all of it in it's BGP messaging. If the peer is not also set to 9K then things will get unstable once your router generates a BGP message that is larger than your peer's MTU. You would want to think about using something like "ip tcp adjust-mss 1460" to keep the BGP messaging smaller. Than 1500 while still supporting packets up to 9000 From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Jamison Masters Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:09 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Jumbo Frames Hi all, We are migrating our connections to 10G, and I'm wondering if I should request jumbo frames. I'm trying for due diligence, and apologize if this is a rudimentary question. Nanog searches do not have clear recommendations, or maybe I did not search enough. My experience with jumbo frames indicates to me that I should be safe with 9000 byte frames, but there could be PMTU discovery and fragmentation issues during transit or on the receiving side. Would you or would you not enable 9K frames with IXP and ISP connections? I just do not have enough experience in this regard, so I am thankful for any thoughts here. My inclination is to go with 9K frames, yet I do not want to deal with ancillary issues that I cannot anticipate, discern, or troubleshoot - especially during a cut. Any experience from the group is appreciated. Thank you, Jamison Masters Verus Corporation jamison(a)veruscorp.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

June 18, 2021

Jumbo Frames

by Jamison Masters

Hi all, We are migrating our connections to 10G, and I'm wondering if I should request jumbo frames. I'm trying for due diligence, and apologize if this is a rudimentary question. Nanog searches do not have clear recommendations, or maybe I did not search enough. My experience with jumbo frames indicates to me that I should be safe with 9000 byte frames, but there could be PMTU discovery and fragmentation issues during transit or on the receiving side. Would you or would you not enable 9K frames with IXP and ISP connections? I just do not have enough experience in this regard, so I am thankful for any thoughts here. My inclination is to go with 9K frames, yet I do not want to deal with ancillary issues that I cannot anticipate, discern, or troubleshoot - especially during a cut. Any experience from the group is appreciated. Thank you, Jamison Masters Verus Corporation jamison(a)veruscorp.com<mailto:jamison@veruscorp.com>

June 18, 2021

Re: Akamai 2x2x100G upgrade

by Jeremy Lumby

The switch config is complete. The new portchannel is 19 -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Jay Hanke Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2021 11:14 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Akamai 2x2x100G upgrade Akamai is upgrading from 1x1x100G LAG to 2x2x100G LAG Port Channel 1 MICE MAIN :: Ethernet3/3/1 [existing] MICE MAIN :: Ethernet3/26/1 [new] Existing IP Information AS20940 IPv4: 206.108.255.84/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27::51cc:0:1/64 Port Channel X <- needs switch ID MICE MAIN :: Ethernet6/8/1 [new] MICE MAIN :: Ethernet6/10/1 [new] New IP Information AS20940 IPv4: 206.108.255.85/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27::51cc:0:2/64 This email will serve as your LOA/CFA and has been filed with Cologix for cross connections to be ordered. We will follow up with an additional email as soon as optics have been installed and the ports have been provisioned. -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

June 16, 2021

Akamai 2x2x100G upgrade

by Jay Hanke

Akamai is upgrading from 1x1x100G LAG to 2x2x100G LAG Port Channel 1 MICE MAIN :: Ethernet3/3/1 [existing] MICE MAIN :: Ethernet3/26/1 [new] Existing IP Information AS20940 IPv4: 206.108.255.84/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27::51cc:0:1/64 Port Channel X <- needs switch ID MICE MAIN :: Ethernet6/8/1 [new] MICE MAIN :: Ethernet6/10/1 [new] New IP Information AS20940 IPv4: 206.108.255.85/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27::51cc:0:2/64 This email will serve as your LOA/CFA and has been filed with Cologix for cross connections to be ordered. We will follow up with an additional email as soon as optics have been installed and the ports have been provisioned. -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

June 16, 2021

Re: Twins Game After MICE Meeting?

by Travis Fincham

We have a few that may be interested? Thanks Travis Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef> ________________________________ From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> on behalf of Reid Fishler <0000000c9d62e487-dmarc-request(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2021 3:49:12 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: [EXTERNAL][MICE-DISCUSS] Twins Game After MICE Meeting? Warning: This email originated from outside of Key Cooperative. DO NOT click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hey everyone- Since it looks like we WILL be having an in person meeting on July 21, I was wondering if anyone wanted to hang around and go see the Twins at home on July 22? Its a night game, 710PM against the LA Angels. I have always wanted to do 2 things in MSP...see a Twins game, and go to the State Fair, and it looks like I may do BOTH this year. :-) Anyone interested? Reid -- Reid Fishler Senior Director Hurricane Electric +1-510-580-4178 ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 ________________________________ NOTICE: This message (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2510-2521, is CONFIDENTIAL, and is intended only for the individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the named addressee or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the named addressee, you are hereby notified that you have received this message in error and that any review, retention, dissemination, distribution, copying or use of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you received this message in error and then delete it.

June 15, 2021

Twins Game After MICE Meeting?

by Reid Fishler

Hey everyone- Since it looks like we WILL be having an in person meeting on July 21, I was wondering if anyone wanted to hang around and go see the Twins at home on July 22? Its a night game, 710PM against the LA Angels. I have always wanted to do 2 things in MSP...see a Twins game, and go to the State Fair, and it looks like I may do BOTH this year. :-) Anyone interested? Reid -- Reid Fishler Senior Director Hurricane Electric +1-510-580-4178

June 15, 2021

Re: Emergency Intrusive testing on SFN Albert Lea remote Transport

by Jay Hanke

We are hands off. On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 9:51 AM Jay Hanke <jayhanke(a)southfront.io> wrote: > We are switching the SFN remote onto the backup path to perform intrusive > testing. > > No interruption is expected. > > -- > Jay Hanke, President > South Front Networks > jayhanke(a)southfront.io > Phone 612-204-0000 > -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

June 15, 2021

Emergency Intrusive testing on SFN Albert Lea remote Transport

by Jay Hanke

We are switching the SFN remote onto the backup path to perform intrusive testing. No interruption is expected. -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

June 15, 2021

Re: Zayo/Other?

by James Urwiller

Yea ours was closer to 3AM. we are good to go now. James Urwiller Network Architect Stealth Broadband james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com *From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *Ben Wiechman *Sent:* Tuesday, June 15, 2021 09:14 *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET *Subject:* Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo/Other? Restoration should have been around 0400 +/- depending on which strands your services were on. The first 48 pairs were largely spliced back somewhat earlier than that. *Ben Wiechman* Director of IP Strategy and Engineering 320.247.3224 | ben.wiechman(a)arvig.com Arvig | 224 East Main Street | Melrose, MN 56352 | arvig.com On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 8:01 AM Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com> wrote: Qrator alerted me that these peers were affected: 46692 (CITYOFWINDOM) 395194 (SBL-NE-ASN) 20412 (CLARITY-TELECOM) 25715 (SW-MN-BROADBAND) Frank *From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *James Urwiller *Sent:* Monday, June 14, 2021 6:01 PM *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET *Subject:* [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo/Other? Did anyone else loose all MICE peers around 14:20 CST? I have a ticket open, but no response as of yet. James Urwiller Network Architect Stealth Broadband james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com ------------------------------ 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

June 15, 2021