- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Global Net (AS395466) - Upcoming Maintenance 10/15

by Global Net NOC

MICEMN Members - We have a short maintenance window scheduled for Monday, October 15th to perform a software upgrade at our edge. Our BGP sessions will flap several times. Start: 10/15/18 1000 GMT End: 10/15/18 1010 GMT Thanks, Global Net NOC noc(a)theglobal.net Global Net Peering peering(a)theglobal.net

Oct. 12, 2018

Re: ADV: [MICE-DISCUSS] Please Welcome ImOn Communications to MICE!

by Doug McIntyre

On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 08:17:54AM -0500, Jay Hanke wrote: >Name: Imon Communications >Port: MN VoIP Remote >ASN: 393238 >IPv4: 206.108.255.114/24 >IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:6:0016::1 /64 >Route Server: YES >BFD Support: YES >Peering Contact: ImOnAdmins(a)imon.net I've added them to the route servers. Welcome aboard! -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Oct. 12, 2018

Please Welcome ImOn Communications to MICE!

by Jay Hanke

Name: Imon Communications Port: MN VoIP Remote ASN: 393238 IPv4: 206.108.255.114/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:6:0016::1 /64 Route Server: YES BFD Support: YES Peering Contact: ImOnAdmins(a)imon.net Please join our mailing lists for technical updates and governance information at http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?A0=MICE-DISCUSS Also, Please update/create your entry at PeeringDB.com listing your connection to the MICE Internet Exchange. We also strongly recommend that you have up to date IRR entries for your networks. Welcome Aboard! -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Oct. 11, 2018

Re: MICE Route Filtering

by David Farmer

On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 9:07 PM Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com> wrote: > I am in favor of this, especially if we have someone that is experienced > that is willing to help. I would propose that we start with RS#2 and test > for a while, then we can notify people who's prefixes are being rejected > prior to applying to RS#1. I would also propose that at the same time we > set RS#2 to be passive so that it cuts down on the chatter that it is > creating on the exchange waiting for people to connect, or people who have > not yet turned up their v6 sessions. I think this would be a great point > of discussion at the next UG. > Generally, that is the suggested plan, but also set a two or three week deadline between filtering on RS#2 and RS#1, and no white listing execptions either. Yes, we should discuss this on Wednesday. I think it is really important to hear from anyone who doesn't think this is a good idea, and why. Thanks =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 ===============================================

Oct. 8, 2018

Re: MICE Route Filtering

by Richard Laager

On 10/06/2018 09:06 PM, Jeremy Lumby wrote: > I would propose that we start with RS#2 and test for a while, then we > can notify people who's prefixes are being rejected prior to applying to > RS#1. That would be ideal. > I would also propose that at the same time we set RS#2 to be > passive so that it cuts down on the chatter that it is creating on the > exchange waiting for people to connect, or people who have not yet > turned up their v6 sessions. Yes, please. -- Richard

Oct. 7, 2018

Re: MICE Route Filtering

by Jeremy Lumby

I am in favor of this, especially if we have someone that is experienced that is willing to help. I would propose that we start with RS#2 and test for a while, then we can notify people who's prefixes are being rejected prior to applying to RS#1. I would also propose that at the same time we set RS#2 to be passive so that it cuts down on the chatter that it is creating on the exchange waiting for people to connect, or people who have not yet turned up their v6 sessions. I think this would be a great point of discussion at the next UG. From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of David Farmer Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2018 11:20 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Route Filtering At NANOG it was strongly suggested we, privately for MICE and more generally for all IXes, should implement IRR filtering on our route servers ASAP. We are now one of the bigger IXes not already filtering, especially in the US. We should probably block routes with invalid RPKI ROAs too. Arouteserver was recommended as one of the better and easier to implement options. There are offers to help us with this from Theo de Raadt <deraadt(a)yycix.ca> of the Calgary Internet Exchange (YYCIX) and by others. https://blog.apnic.net/2017/03/17/ixp-automation-made-easy-new-open-source-… https://github.com/pierky/arouteserver https://arouteserver.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ FYI additionally, Fastly already filters based on IRR objects, and HE has recently started filtering. https://www.fastly.com/peering http://routing.he.net/algorithm.html Also at NANOG, it was announced by Google that they plan to begin filtering routes based IRR data early next year. See slide 114 of the following; https://pc.nanog.org/static/published/meetings/NANOG74/1760/20181003_Tzveta… There is lots of other good stuff in the deck, but the fact that Google plans to start filtering based on IRR objects is BIG news. So, we need to escalate doing route filtering on our Route Servers. Furthermore, if you don't already have IRR objects, you should probably start working on them. The following is a handy tool to check the consistency of your IRR objects. http://irrexplorer.nlnog.net/ Thanks. -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 =============================================== To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 7, 2018

MICE Route Filtering

by David Farmer

At NANOG it was strongly suggested we, privately for MICE and more generally for all IXes, should implement IRR filtering on our route servers ASAP. We are now one of the bigger IXes not already filtering, especially in the US. We should probably block routes with invalid RPKI ROAs too. Arouteserver was recommended as one of the better and easier to implement options. There are offers to help us with this from Theo de Raadt < deraadt(a)yycix.ca> of the Calgary Internet Exchange (YYCIX) and by others. https://blog.apnic.net/2017/03/17/ixp-automation-made-easy-new-open-source-… https://github.com/pierky/arouteserver https://arouteserver.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ FYI additionally, Fastly already filters based on IRR objects, and HE has recently started filtering. https://www.fastly.com/peering http://routing.he.net/algorithm.html Also at NANOG, it was announced by Google that they plan to begin filtering routes based IRR data early next year. See slide 114 of the following; https://pc.nanog.org/static/published/meetings/NANOG74/1760/20181003_Tzveta… There is lots of other good stuff in the deck, but the fact that Google plans to start filtering based on IRR objects is BIG news. So, we need to escalate doing route filtering on our Route Servers. Furthermore, if you don't already have IRR objects, you should probably start working on them. The following is a handy tool to check the consistency of your IRR objects. http://irrexplorer.nlnog.net/ Thanks. -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 ===============================================

Oct. 6, 2018

Fwd: Voting Now Open for the 2018 ARIN Board of Trustees, ARIN Advisory Council, and NRO NC Elections

by David Farmer

If you are an ARIN Member voting contact please remember to vote. If you are not your organizations voting contact please remind your voting contact to vote. If you would like suggestions on who to vote for please email me off the list. By the way, I'm not up until next year, but voting is still important. Thanks. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: ARIN <info(a)arin.net> Date: Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 5:01 PM Subject: [arin-announce] Voting Now Open for the 2018 ARIN Board of Trustees, ARIN Advisory Council, and NRO NC Elections To: <arin-announce(a)arin.net> Cast your online ballot now in the 2018 ARIN Elections to fill two seats on the ARIN Board of Trustees, five seats on the ARIN Advisory Council, and one seat on the Number Resource Organization Number Council (NRO NC). Eligible Voting Contacts from General Members in Good Standing as of the voter eligibility deadline of 20 August, may cast an online ballot now through 6:00 PM EDT, Friday, 12 October. To vote, simply log in to ARIN Online and look for the “Vote Now” link on your dashboard. To view candidate biographies, please view the ARIN Elections 2018 Voter Guide at: https://www.arin.net/participate/elections/candidate_bios.pdf To view or submit a Statement of Support, please click on the link below. Anyone, regardless of voter status, is eligible to submit a Statement of Support for a candidate. https://www.bigpulse.com/p51139/ During the week of 8 October, all eligible Voting Contacts should be aware that an ARIN representative will be personally calling them as a gentle reminder to please vote and to answer any election-related questions they may have. Participation in the election process is crucial, requires only minutes of a voter’s time, is done online, and is an important member responsibility. A single cast ballot provides eligible member organizations an opportunity to shape the future of ARIN, our community, and the Internet. For questions about voting, or if you encounter an issue with the election system, please contact a member of the Member Services team immediately via email at members(a)arin.net or submit a question via ARIN Online and direct it to Meetings/Elections. Regards, Wendy Leedy Member Engagement Coordinator American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 ===============================================

Oct. 6, 2018

Re: ADV: [MICE-DISCUSS] Anyone else seeing AS36040 (Google/Youtube) bouncing in and out this morning

by Frank Bulk

That’s a reasonable guess – the NOC escalated this to another department, but I don’t think the underlying cause for the prefix adv/withdrawal was found. Frank From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Darin Steffl Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2018 9:50 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] ADV: [MICE-DISCUSS] Anyone else seeing AS36040 (Google/Youtube) bouncing in and out this morning Looks like Google's traffic dropped from around 60G to under 20G tonight so they must be working on their peering to MICE? On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 12:20 PM Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com<mailto:fbulk@mypremieronline.com>> wrote: Thanks, I've sent a note to peering(a)google.com<mailto:peering@google.com>. Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>> On Behalf Of Doug McIntyre Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2018 11:39 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] ADV: [MICE-DISCUSS] Anyone else seeing AS36040 (Google/Youtube) bouncing in and out this morning On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 04:12:04PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Since 9:29 am a third-party service we use has been noticing that AS36040 is coming and going. I assume that it's seeing it from MICE's router server ... any way to confirm? 36040 does talk to the route servers, and the route hasn't been up that long. I don't have any errors logged for 36040 though. Just the route keeps getting injected and withdrawn. 104.237.191.0/24<http://104.237.191.0/24> is withdrawn now from 36040. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net<mailto:merlyn@iphouse.net>> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades -- Darin Steffl Minnesota WiFi www.mnwifi.com<http://www.mnwifi.com/> 507-634-WiFi [http://www.snoitulosten.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/facebook-small.jpg]<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 5, 2018

Re: Kansas City Internet eXchange peer and beer

by Brandon Mulligan

...I apologize for sending a partial message... This is a good opportunity to meet fellow network operators in the Kansas City region, learn more about traffic exchanging opportunities and, of course, partake of some KC craft beers. This year we've chosen Cinder Block Brewery to host us. There is no cost to attend. We will provide the beer and food. All you need to do is show up. We will start with beer and food at 5pm. Our presentation starts at 6pm allowing time for visitors to arrive. The rest of the time is up to you to peer and drink beer! Non alcoholic beverages will also be provided. The event will be held on October 16th 2018 from 5-9pm at Cinder Block Brewery, 110 East 18th Ave, North Kansas City, MO 64116. Please reach out to info(a)kcix.net or brandon(a)kcix.net if you wish to attend. On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 1:35 PM Brandon Mulligan <brandon(a)kcix.net> wrote: > Greetings. > > The Kansas City Internet eXchange is holding a free peer and beer event on > Tuesday October 16th. We welcome any network operators from the midwest > region. >

Oct. 4, 2018

Kansas City Internet eXchange peer and beer

by Brandon Mulligan

Greetings. The Kansas City Internet eXchange is holding a free peer and beer event on Tuesday October 16th. We welcome any network operators from the midwest region.

Oct. 4, 2018

Re: ADV: [MICE-DISCUSS] Anyone else seeing AS36040 (Google/Youtube) bouncing in and out this morning

by Darin Steffl

Looks like Google's traffic dropped from around 60G to under 20G tonight so they must be working on their peering to MICE? On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 12:20 PM Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com> wrote: > Thanks, I've sent a note to peering(a)google.com. > > Frank > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Doug > McIntyre > Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2018 11:39 AM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] ADV: [MICE-DISCUSS] Anyone else seeing AS36040 > (Google/Youtube) bouncing in and out this morning > > On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 04:12:04PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: > >Since 9:29 am a third-party service we use has been noticing that AS36040 > is coming and going. I assume that it's seeing it from MICE's router server > ... any way to confirm? > > 36040 does talk to the route servers, and the route hasn't been > up that long. I don't have any errors logged for 36040 though. > Just the route keeps getting injected and withdrawn. > 104.237.191.0/24 is withdrawn now from 36040. > > > -- > Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> > ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ > Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades > -- Darin Steffl Minnesota WiFi www.mnwifi.com 507-634-WiFi <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>

Oct. 4, 2018

Re: ADV: [MICE-DISCUSS] Anyone else seeing AS36040 (Google/Youtube) bouncing in and out this morning

by Frank Bulk

Thanks, I've sent a note to peering(a)google.com. Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Doug McIntyre Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2018 11:39 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] ADV: [MICE-DISCUSS] Anyone else seeing AS36040 (Google/Youtube) bouncing in and out this morning On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 04:12:04PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Since 9:29 am a third-party service we use has been noticing that AS36040 is coming and going. I assume that it's seeing it from MICE's router server ... any way to confirm? 36040 does talk to the route servers, and the route hasn't been up that long. I don't have any errors logged for 36040 though. Just the route keeps getting injected and withdrawn. 104.237.191.0/24 is withdrawn now from 36040. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Oct. 3, 2018

Re: ADV: [MICE-DISCUSS] Anyone else seeing AS36040 (Google/Youtube) bouncing in and out this morning

by Doug McIntyre

On Wed, Oct 03, 2018 at 04:12:04PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Since 9:29 am a third-party service we use has been noticing that AS36040 is coming and going. I assume that it's seeing it from MICE's router server ... any way to confirm? 36040 does talk to the route servers, and the route hasn't been up that long. I don't have any errors logged for 36040 though. Just the route keeps getting injected and withdrawn. 104.237.191.0/24 is withdrawn now from 36040. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Oct. 3, 2018

Anyone else seeing AS36040 (Google/Youtube) bouncing in and out this morning

by Frank Bulk

Since 9:29 am a third-party service we use has been noticing that AS36040 is coming and going. I assume that it's seeing it from MICE's router server ... any way to confirm? Frank

Oct. 3, 2018

Last call for Arista Training Day!

by John McLaughlin

Hello MICE Members: Interested in learning more about why Arista Networks is quickly becoming the preferred choice in the datacenter, hybrid clouded central offices? Please join Arista Networks for a no-cost, full day of training with hands-on labs, led by Arista Engineers. Minnet When and Where? Wednesday, October 3rd, 9:00AM - 4:00PM Minnetonka Executive Suites - Lake Superior Room <https://maps.google.com/?q=12800+WhiteWater+Drive+Minnetonka,+MN,+55343&ent…> 12800 WhiteWater Drive <https://maps.google.com/?q=12800+WhiteWater+Drive+Minnetonka,+MN,+55343&ent…> Minnetonka, MN, 55343 <https://maps.google.com/?q=12800+WhiteWater+Drive+Minnetonka,+MN,+55343&ent…> Topics include the following: Arista Corporate overview Extensible Operating System (EOS®) overview and CLI Multi-Chassis Aggregation (MLAG) and Virtual ARP (VARP) overview Building Multi-Tenant Services with EVPN and VXLAN Provisioning with Arista CloudVision® Portal (CVP) Arista eAPI Lunch will be provided. **Note: please bring a laptop to access virtual labs. John McLaughlin North Central Sales jmclaughlin(a)arista.com Cell# 612-816-9024 https://www.barrons.com/articles/worlds-best-ceos-growth-leaders-1527304583…

Oct. 1, 2018

Re: Nanog?

by David Farmer

I'll be at NAMOG and ARIN Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 30, 2018, at 12:05, Reid Fishler <rfishler(a)HE.NET> wrote: > > Whose coming? > This week, Vancouver. > > Reid > > > -- > Reid Fishler > 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

Sept. 30, 2018

Nanog?

by Reid Fishler

Whose coming? This week, Vancouver. Reid -- Reid Fishler Director Hurricane Electric +1-510-580-4178

Sept. 30, 2018

Re: South Front Networks, LLC Remote switch request

by Jay Hanke

In the event of congestion or other techinical issue that is not able to be resolved in the stacked configuration with Mn VoIP, It is the understanding of SFN that SFN would be required to establish direct links. On Fri, Sep 28, 2018, 5:56 PM Justin Krejci <JKrejci(a)usinternet.com> wrote: > This falls into the category of extreme nit picking but the remote switch > website document says this > > > "Operators are responsible for the costs of operating their remote switch > and the links to the core switch. They must monitor their traffic levels > and promptly add capacity to keep the links running congestion-free." > > > Under this wording, SFN would be responsible for the links to the core > switch which would actually be on the MN VoIP switch link in this context > and is something I would expect is not within SFN's ability to manage > seeing as how SFN, presumably, does not manage MN VoIP's equipment or > links. > > As I initially stated, this is more nit picking as I would personally > interpret the intent of the message on the website to be "remote switch > operator egress link(s) towards the core switch" in this context since the > SFN switch would have no links of its own to the core switch. I expect the > context of tiered remote switches like this was not originally considered > when the text was composed/agreed upon and if this topology is permitted, I > would suggest the website language be updated to reflect/consider this. > > With my described interpretation, I have no objections to the tiered > remote-remote-switch setup. If this request is accepted as written, I would > suggest MICE consider capping this tiered remote switch approach at 2 > deep (as in this case) as a max; I feel it would begin to get cumbersome to > manage/track the administrative relationships, troubleshooting, managing > the traffic graphing configurations, etc. My cap suggestion is just a > starting point off, not something I am adamantly positioned on and possibly > this would be better discussed in a separate thread. > > I would also think it wise to look at MICE's big brother SIX and see if > they have encountered this kind of scenario/request before and if so, what > their conclusions were. > > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> on behalf of > Richard Laager <rlaager(a)WIKTEL.COM> > *Sent:* Friday, September 28, 2018 3:31 PM > *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > *Subject:* Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] South Front Networks, LLC Remote switch > request > > I'm bringing this remote switch request to the discussion list per our > remote switch policy: > http://micemn.net/technical.html > > On 09/28/2018 09:25 AM, Jay Hanke wrote: > > South Front Networks requests approval to install a MICE Remote Switch in > SFN's Albert Lea Datacenter. > > South Front proposes the following: > 1) SFN will acquire a Juniper QFX5100 or Arista comparable switch > dedicated to MICE. > 2) SFN will acquire and pay for any required connectivity back to the MN > VoIP remote switch, MN VoIP and SFN remote switches will share the existing > 40 Gbps MICE link into the main fabric. Both SFN and MN VoIP agree to > upgrade capacity as needed on the uplink to the main switch. > 3) SFN will initially install 20 Gbps of capacity and will upgrade > capacity as needed per the board and technical committee requirements > 4) SFN agrees to enforce the MICE technical port rules > 5) SFN agrees to coordinate connections to the new remote switch > 6) SFN agrees to inform all prospective members that connections going to > the SFN MICE Remote switch are not connected directly to MICE. > 7) SFN agrees to perform any required configuration and troubleshooting > 8) SFN agrees to provide configuration access and snmp access to the MICE > technical committee to ease troubleshooting and to provide publicly > available graphing. > > Thanks! > > -- > Jay Hanke, President > South Front Networks > jayhanke(a)southfront.io > Phone 612-204-0000 > > -- > Richard > > > ------------------------------ > > 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 >

Sept. 29, 2018

South Front Networks, LLC Remote switch request

by Richard Laager

I think that SFN is responsible to ensure congestion-free capacity all the way back to the core switch. MN VoIP is separately responsible for ensuring congestion-free capacity from its remote to the core, but in the worst case scenario where MN VoIP failed to upgrade its links, I would argue that SFN still has a separate obligation to remedy the congestion to their switch, by switching to direct links if necessary. This is all hopefully theoretical, of course. This proposal has MN VoIP's cooperation and re-affirmed commitment to upgrade as needed. -- Richard

Sept. 29, 2018

Re: South Front Networks, LLC Remote switch request

by Justin Krejci

This falls into the category of extreme nit picking but the remote switch website document says this "Operators are responsible for the costs of operating their remote switch and the links to the core switch. They must monitor their traffic levels and promptly add capacity to keep the links running congestion-free." Under this wording, SFN would be responsible for the links to the core switch which would actually be on the MN VoIP switch link in this context and is something I would expect is not within SFN's ability to manage seeing as how SFN, presumably, does not manage MN VoIP's equipment or links. As I initially stated, this is more nit picking as I would personally interpret the intent of the message on the website to be "remote switch operator egress link(s) towards the core switch" in this context since the SFN switch would have no links of its own to the core switch. I expect the context of tiered remote switches like this was not originally considered when the text was composed/agreed upon and if this topology is permitted, I would suggest the website language be updated to reflect/consider this. With my described interpretation, I have no objections to the tiered remote-remote-switch setup. If this request is accepted as written, I would suggest MICE consider capping this tiered remote switch approach at 2 deep (as in this case) as a max; I feel it would begin to get cumbersome to manage/track the administrative relationships, troubleshooting, managing the traffic graphing configurations, etc. My cap suggestion is just a starting point off, not something I am adamantly positioned on and possibly this would be better discussed in a separate thread. I would also think it wise to look at MICE's big brother SIX and see if they have encountered this kind of scenario/request before and if so, what their conclusions were. ________________________________ From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> on behalf of Richard Laager <rlaager(a)WIKTEL.COM> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 3:31 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] South Front Networks, LLC Remote switch request I'm bringing this remote switch request to the discussion list per our remote switch policy: http://micemn.net/technical.html On 09/28/2018 09:25 AM, Jay Hanke wrote: South Front Networks requests approval to install a MICE Remote Switch in SFN's Albert Lea Datacenter. South Front proposes the following: 1) SFN will acquire a Juniper QFX5100 or Arista comparable switch dedicated to MICE. 2) SFN will acquire and pay for any required connectivity back to the MN VoIP remote switch, MN VoIP and SFN remote switches will share the existing 40 Gbps MICE link into the main fabric. Both SFN and MN VoIP agree to upgrade capacity as needed on the uplink to the main switch. 3) SFN will initially install 20 Gbps of capacity and will upgrade capacity as needed per the board and technical committee requirements 4) SFN agrees to enforce the MICE technical port rules 5) SFN agrees to coordinate connections to the new remote switch 6) SFN agrees to inform all prospective members that connections going to the SFN MICE Remote switch are not connected directly to MICE. 7) SFN agrees to perform any required configuration and troubleshooting 8) SFN agrees to provide configuration access and snmp access to the MICE technical committee to ease troubleshooting and to provide publicly available graphing. Thanks! -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io<mailto:jayhanke@southfront.io> Phone 612-204-0000 -- Richard ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Sept. 28, 2018

Re: South Front Networks, LLC Remote switch request

by Richard Laager

I'm bringing this remote switch request to the discussion list per our remote switch policy: http://micemn.net/technical.html On 09/28/2018 09:25 AM, Jay Hanke wrote: > South Front Networks requests approval to install a MICE Remote Switch > in SFN's Albert Lea Datacenter. > > South Front proposes the following: > 1) SFN will acquire a Juniper QFX5100 or Arista comparable switch > dedicated to MICE. > 2) SFN will acquire and pay for any required connectivity back to the > MN VoIP remote switch, MN VoIP and SFN remote switches will share the > existing 40 Gbps MICE link into the main fabric. Both SFN and MN VoIP > agree to upgrade capacity as needed on the uplink to the main switch. > 3) SFN will initially install 20 Gbps of capacity and will upgrade > capacity as needed per the board and technical committee requirements > 4) SFN agrees to enforce the MICE technical port rules > 5) SFN agrees to coordinate connections to the new remote switch > 6) SFN agrees to inform all prospective members that connections going > to the SFN MICE Remote switch are not connected directly to MICE. > 7) SFN agrees to perform any required configuration and troubleshooting > 8) SFN agrees to provide configuration access and snmp access to the > MICE technical committee to ease troubleshooting and to provide > publicly available graphing. > > Thanks! > > -- > Jay Hanke, President > South Front Networks > jayhanke(a)southfront.io <mailto:jayhanke@southfront.io> > Phone 612-204-0000 -- Richard

Sept. 28, 2018

Re: Role email accounts on the list

by Steve Howard

Sept. 28, 2018

Re: Role email accounts on the list

by Jay Hanke

As long as they don't open a new ticket for each email it's no problem for me. DISCUSS is the best place to know what's going for a NOC for MICE issues. On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 11:23 AM Mike Horwath <drechsau(a)geeks.org> wrote: > How do people feel about this? > > We just had someone join the list using a noc@ email address. > > -- > Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG > -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Sept. 28, 2018

Role email accounts on the list

by Mike Horwath

How do people feel about this? We just had someone join the list using a noc@ email address. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Sept. 28, 2018