- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Re: Arista Support Contract

by Richard Laager

> On Feb 1, 2018, at 19:50, Andrew Hoyos <hoyosa(a)GMAIL.COM> wrote: > > I’m a numbers guy - can you fill in the blanks on what 1yr vs 3yr contract costs are, and what’s in the bank now vs what’s expected when folks pay this years port fees? The numbers are deliberately missing. Vendors tend to expect/require confidentiality on pricing. I can take numbers from you though. If you wish to share your thoughts on what 1 vs 3 year ratios are fair, a minimum balance for MICE to maintain, etc., please do. -- Richard

Feb. 2, 2018

Re: Arista Support Contract

by Richard Laager

> On Feb 1, 2018, at 19:45, Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)MNVOIP.COM> wrote: > > It is also a nice time to call for any donations. On donations, free money is obviously great, but we do need to watch the 85% rule now that we are a co-op. If someone is interested in donating, please contact me off-list. Paying your port fees invoice promptly is also helpful here. -- Richard

Feb. 2, 2018

Re: Arista Support Contract

by David Farmer

+1 Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 1, 2018, at 19:45, Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)MNVOIP.COM> wrote: > > I think it is worth getting the discount even though it draws the account down quite a bit. Thanks Arista for allowing the split. It is also a nice time to call for any donations. If anyone has been thinking about donating, but was on the fence about when, now would be a great time! > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager > Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 6:52 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Arista Support Contract > > MICE is responsible for the on-going support contract costs for the main > Arista switch. This was factored into the design of the port fees. > > We have received quotes from Arista. As is customary, the three-year > price is cheaper per year than the one-year price. The savings is > non-trivial, especially relative to our annual revenue, so I think it > would be wise to purchase the three-year contract. > > The three-year contract cost is more than our current cash balance. > After we collect this year's port fees, we will be able to cover it > while keeping a reasonable reserve. However, we need to do something > sooner, as it needs to be renewed this month. Fortunately, Arista has > offered to let us split the order in two halves to avoid us drawing the > bank balance too close to zero. > > Does the membership have any input they'd like to provide the board in > this matter? > > -- > Richard

Feb. 2, 2018

Re: Arista Support Contract

by Andrew Hoyos

I’m a numbers guy - can you fill in the blanks on what 1yr vs 3yr contract costs are, and what’s in the bank now vs what’s expected when folks pay this years port fees? I’m sure it’s a no brainer to go with the 3year option, but having actual numbers to back it up are helpful here :) Also, with the order split scenario, when would they expect payments? Thanks! — Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com > On Feb 1, 2018, at 6:51 PM, Richard Laager <rlaager(a)WIKTEL.COM> wrote: > > MICE is responsible for the on-going support contract costs for the main > Arista switch. This was factored into the design of the port fees. > > We have received quotes from Arista. As is customary, the three-year > price is cheaper per year than the one-year price. The savings is > non-trivial, especially relative to our annual revenue, so I think it > would be wise to purchase the three-year contract. > > The three-year contract cost is more than our current cash balance. > After we collect this year's port fees, we will be able to cover it > while keeping a reasonable reserve. However, we need to do something > sooner, as it needs to be renewed this month. Fortunately, Arista has > offered to let us split the order in two halves to avoid us drawing the > bank balance too close to zero. > > Does the membership have any input they'd like to provide the board in > this matter? > > -- > Richard

Feb. 2, 2018

Re: Arista Support Contract

by Jeremy Lumby

I think it is worth getting the discount even though it draws the account down quite a bit. Thanks Arista for allowing the split. It is also a nice time to call for any donations. If anyone has been thinking about donating, but was on the fence about when, now would be a great time! -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2018 6:52 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Arista Support Contract MICE is responsible for the on-going support contract costs for the main Arista switch. This was factored into the design of the port fees. We have received quotes from Arista. As is customary, the three-year price is cheaper per year than the one-year price. The savings is non-trivial, especially relative to our annual revenue, so I think it would be wise to purchase the three-year contract. The three-year contract cost is more than our current cash balance. After we collect this year's port fees, we will be able to cover it while keeping a reasonable reserve. However, we need to do something sooner, as it needs to be renewed this month. Fortunately, Arista has offered to let us split the order in two halves to avoid us drawing the bank balance too close to zero. Does the membership have any input they'd like to provide the board in this matter? -- Richard

Feb. 2, 2018

Arista Support Contract

by Richard Laager

MICE is responsible for the on-going support contract costs for the main Arista switch. This was factored into the design of the port fees. We have received quotes from Arista. As is customary, the three-year price is cheaper per year than the one-year price. The savings is non-trivial, especially relative to our annual revenue, so I think it would be wise to purchase the three-year contract. The three-year contract cost is more than our current cash balance. After we collect this year's port fees, we will be able to cover it while keeping a reasonable reserve. However, we need to do something sooner, as it needs to be renewed this month. Fortunately, Arista has offered to let us split the order in two halves to avoid us drawing the bank balance too close to zero. Does the membership have any input they'd like to provide the board in this matter? -- Richard

Feb. 2, 2018

Wow - new record traffic?

by Michael Hemphill

Hey MICE members. I see that last night MICE hit 233 Gig In & Out!! Is this a new peak for the exchange? State of the Union I suspect. Mike Mike Hemphill ColoConnect 612-812-5242 mikeh(a)ColoConnect.net<mailto:mikeh@ColoConnect.net> http://www.ColoConnect.net/ [cid:image003.jpg@01D39A8B.DB245780]

Jan. 31, 2018

Yahoo IPv4 prefix count limits tripped this morning

by Frank Bulk

Our IPv4 prefix count limits for two peering sessions with Yahoo (now Oath) tripped this morning around 3:04 and 3:11, respectively. They went from being under 163 to 219, at least a 30% increase. Just curious, are they doing some consolidation? The graph at bgp.he.net suggests that they've been at the 219 level for some months, so perhaps these are some prefixes that are only just now are showing up at MICE? Frank

Jan. 25, 2018

MN VoIP 40G upgrade

by Jason Hanke

MN Voip is upgrading the link to their remote switch to 40G. The new port will be Ethernet 3/6/1 -- 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

Jan. 24, 2018

Re: Akamai bounce and graph

by DeLong, Owen

Yes please. We don’t disclose per-port statistics generally. Owen On Jan 18, 2018, at 07:37 , Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)MNVOIP.COM<mailto:jlumby@MNVOIP.COM>> wrote: My session bounced as well. When Marty was at Akamai, he requested that their graph be private. From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Frank Bulk Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 9:29 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Akamai bounce and graph We saw our peering session with Akamai bounce around 9:10 am – anyone else? Jan 18 09:11:30 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.84 UP (ESTABLISHED) Jan 18 09:11:38 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::51cc:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) And for some reason Akamai’s Cacti graph doesn’t show up in the Arista -> Traffic section. Is that opaque on purpose? I ask because when I click through it says “ACCESS DENIED” (in red =) ). Frank AS53347 ________________________________ 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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.iphouse.net_cgi-2…>

Jan. 18, 2018

Re: Akamai bounce and graph

by Jeremy Lumby

My session bounced as well. When Marty was at Akamai, he requested that their graph be private. From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Frank Bulk Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2018 9:29 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Akamai bounce and graph We saw our peering session with Akamai bounce around 9:10 am – anyone else? Jan 18 09:11:30 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.84 UP (ESTABLISHED) Jan 18 09:11:38 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::51cc:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) And for some reason Akamai’s Cacti graph doesn’t show up in the Arista -> Traffic section. Is that opaque on purpose? I ask because when I click through it says “ACCESS DENIED” (in red =) ). Frank AS53347 To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Jan. 18, 2018

Akamai bounce and graph

by Frank Bulk

We saw our peering session with Akamai bounce around 9:10 am - anyone else? Jan 18 09:11:30 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.84 UP (ESTABLISHED) Jan 18 09:11:38 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::51cc:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) And for some reason Akamai's Cacti graph doesn't show up in the Arista -> Traffic section. Is that opaque on purpose? I ask because when I click through it says "ACCESS DENIED" (in red =) ). Frank AS53347

Jan. 18, 2018

Re: MICE Looking Glass router

by David Farmer

Thanks, guys, you're the best! On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Justin Krejci <JKrejci(a)usinternet.com> wrote: > David, ask and thou shall receive, so sayeth Anthony, Jeremy, Doug and > Justin.... > > > > micemn-lg>*show bgp ipv4 u 8.45.162.0/24 <http://8.45.162.0/24>* > BGP routing table entry for 8.45.162.0/24, version 170 > Paths: (2 available, best #1, table default) > Not advertised to any peer > Refresh Epoch 1 > 6939 46887 395343 395343 395343 > 206.108.255.52 from 206.108.255.1 (206.108.255.1) > Origin IGP, metric 265, localpref 100, valid, external, best > Community: 0:2906 0:12989 0:13335 0:15133 0:15169 0:16509 0:20940 > 0:22822 0:36040 > Refresh Epoch 1 > 6939 46887 395343 395343 395343 > 206.108.255.52 from 206.108.255.2 (206.108.255.2) > Origin IGP, metric 265, localpref 100, valid, external > Community: 0:2906 0:12989 0:13335 0:15133 0:15169 0:16509 0:20940 > 0:22822 0:36040 > micemn-lg> > > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> on behalf of David > Farmer <farmer(a)UMN.EDU> > *Sent:* Friday, January 5, 2018 12:13 PM > *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > *Subject:* [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Looking Glass router > > The MICE Looking Glass router doesn't seem to be supporting 4-byte ASNs. > > Could someone upgrade the code please. > > Thanks. > > > -- > =============================================== > David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu > Networking & Telecommunication Services > Office of Information Technology > University of Minnesota > 2218 University Ave SE > <https://maps.google.com/?q=2218+University+Ave+SE&entry=gmail&source=g> > Phone: 612-626-0815 <(612)%20626-0815> > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 <(612)%20812-9952> > =============================================== > > ------------------------------ > > 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 > -- =============================================== 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 ===============================================

Jan. 17, 2018

Re: UG 27 / MTA

by Reid Fishler

I can't make Wed after the show, I have to run out back to NY. Reid On Jan 17, 2018 1:07 PM, "Richard Laager" <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: MTA has agreed to give us a table across from the registration desk. Ideally, we would have someone sit there to talk about MICE with anyone interested. Here are the MTA registration times: Monday, March 26 - 12:00 pm - 6:30 pm Tuesday, March 27 - 7:30 am - 5:00 pm Wednesday, March 28 - 7:30 am - 12:00 pm I'd imagine most people will be registering on Monday or early Tuesday. I'm happy to sit there, but our UG 27 meeting is currently scheduled for Monday at 3:00, which pretty much shoots the whole Monday timeslot. At best, I could setup some things on the table and then rush to 511 for the UG meeting. One option is to move the UG meeting to Tuesday, March 27 at 3:00. This would allow me (and/or anyone else interested) to sit at the MICE table on Monday afternoon and Tuesday morning. On the other hand, if someone was planning on attending both MTA and UG 27, it seems like this would create a conflict. Another option would be to leave the meeting as is, and have someone else (who would skip the UG meeting) volunteer to sit at the table on Monday. A third option would be to reschedule the UG meeting to Wednesday, after MTA concludes. How do you feel about these options? Any other suggestions? -- Richard

Jan. 17, 2018

Re: MICE Looking Glass router

by Justin Krejci

David, ask and thou shall receive, so sayeth Anthony, Jeremy, Doug and Justin.... micemn-lg>show bgp ipv4 u 8.45.162.0/24 BGP routing table entry for 8.45.162.0/24, version 170 Paths: (2 available, best #1, table default) Not advertised to any peer Refresh Epoch 1 6939 46887 395343 395343 395343 206.108.255.52 from 206.108.255.1 (206.108.255.1) Origin IGP, metric 265, localpref 100, valid, external, best Community: 0:2906 0:12989 0:13335 0:15133 0:15169 0:16509 0:20940 0:22822 0:36040 Refresh Epoch 1 6939 46887 395343 395343 395343 206.108.255.52 from 206.108.255.2 (206.108.255.2) Origin IGP, metric 265, localpref 100, valid, external Community: 0:2906 0:12989 0:13335 0:15133 0:15169 0:16509 0:20940 0:22822 0:36040 micemn-lg> ________________________________ From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> on behalf of David Farmer <farmer(a)UMN.EDU> Sent: Friday, January 5, 2018 12:13 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Looking Glass router The MICE Looking Glass router doesn't seem to be supporting 4-byte ASNs. Could someone upgrade the code please. Thanks. -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu<mailto:Email%3Afarmer@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

Jan. 17, 2018

UG 27 / MTA

by Richard Laager

MTA has agreed to give us a table across from the registration desk. Ideally, we would have someone sit there to talk about MICE with anyone interested. Here are the MTA registration times: Monday, March 26 - 12:00 pm - 6:30 pm Tuesday, March 27 - 7:30 am - 5:00 pm Wednesday, March 28 - 7:30 am - 12:00 pm I'd imagine most people will be registering on Monday or early Tuesday. I'm happy to sit there, but our UG 27 meeting is currently scheduled for Monday at 3:00, which pretty much shoots the whole Monday timeslot. At best, I could setup some things on the table and then rush to 511 for the UG meeting. One option is to move the UG meeting to Tuesday, March 27 at 3:00. This would allow me (and/or anyone else interested) to sit at the MICE table on Monday afternoon and Tuesday morning. On the other hand, if someone was planning on attending both MTA and UG 27, it seems like this would create a conflict. Another option would be to leave the meeting as is, and have someone else (who would skip the UG meeting) volunteer to sit at the table on Monday. A third option would be to reschedule the UG meeting to Wednesday, after MTA concludes. How do you feel about these options? Any other suggestions? -- Richard

Jan. 17, 2018

Please Welcome Coloplast to MICE!

by Jason Hanke

Name: Coloplast Port: ge-0/0/19 (Copper Main) ASN: 25111 IPv4: 206.108.255.91/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:6217::1/64 Peering Contact: plmgaw(a)coloplast.com Route Server: Yes BFD: NO Please update your peeringdb information as soon as you have the chance. Thanks! -- 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

Jan. 16, 2018

Re: MICE route reflect hiccup last night?

by Doug McIntyre

It is set for missing 3 BFD updates will drop it, but I believe an error condition like "invalid flags (248)" is what caused the issue. I don't see any flags in RFC5880, I suspect source code reading would be next to see what BIRD thought of flags in BFD that aren't mentioned in the RFC. On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:07:17PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Thanks. This is why BFD can be so frustrating. So just one bad packet and the BFD session was torn down? Or three in a row? > >Frank > >-----Original Message----- >From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Doug McIntyre >Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2018 3:08 PM >To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE route reflect hiccup last night? > >On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:25:44PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >>Our logs show that MICE RR #1 had a hiccup overnight ... none of our other BGP sessions to MICE were interrupted. Did something scheduled happened? > >No, but your BFD session received.. > >2018-01-09 03:41:40 <RMT> bfd1: Bad packet from 206.108.255.67 - invalid flags (248) > >That's all I've got related to it in the logs. > >-- >Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> > ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ > Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades > -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Jan. 10, 2018

Re: MICE route reflect hiccup last night?

by Frank Bulk

Thanks. This is why BFD can be so frustrating. So just one bad packet and the BFD session was torn down? Or three in a row? Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Doug McIntyre Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2018 3:08 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE route reflect hiccup last night? On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:25:44PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Our logs show that MICE RR #1 had a hiccup overnight ... none of our other BGP sessions to MICE were interrupted. Did something scheduled happened? No, but your BFD session received.. 2018-01-09 03:41:40 <RMT> bfd1: Bad packet from 206.108.255.67 - invalid flags (248) That's all I've got related to it in the logs. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Jan. 9, 2018

Re: MICE route reflect hiccup last night?

by Doug McIntyre

On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 08:25:44PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Our logs show that MICE RR #1 had a hiccup overnight ... none of our other BGP sessions to MICE were interrupted. Did something scheduled happened? No, but your BFD session received.. 2018-01-09 03:41:40 <RMT> bfd1: Bad packet from 206.108.255.67 - invalid flags (248) That's all I've got related to it in the logs. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Jan. 9, 2018

MICE route reflect hiccup last night?

by Frank Bulk

Our logs show that MICE RR #1 had a hiccup overnight ... none of our other BGP sessions to MICE were interrupted. Did something scheduled happened? Jan 9 03:41:41 192.168.0.85 BFD: Session DOWN for 206.108.255.1 on eth 2/2 Reason:Detection Time Expired Jan 9 03:41:41 192.168.0.85 BFD: Session UP for 206.108.255.1 on eth 2/2 Jan 9 03:41:41 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.1 DOWN (Rcv Notification:CEASE Message) Jan 9 03:41:41 192.168.0.85 BFD: Session DOWN for 206.108.255.1 on eth 2/2 Reason:Administratively Down Jan 9 03:41:41 192.168.0.85 BFD: Session DOWN for 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 on eth 2/2 Reason:Detection Time Expired Jan 9 03:41:41 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 DOWN (Rcv Notification:CEASE Message) Jan 9 03:42:36 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 206.108.255.1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Jan 9 03:42:36 192.168.0.85 BFD: Session UP for 206.108.255.1 on eth 2/2 Jan 9 03:42:41 192.168.0.85 BGP: Peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 UP (ESTABLISHED) Frank

Jan. 9, 2018

MICE Looking Glass router

by David Farmer

The MICE Looking Glass router doesn't seem to be supporting 4-byte ASNs. Could someone upgrade the code please. 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 ===============================================

Jan. 5, 2018

Re: Passive BFD support on Route-Server #1

by Frank Bulk

Great, thanks! -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Friday, December 29, 2017 11:13 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Passive BFD support on Route-Server #1 On 12/29/2017 09:38 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: > Can the documentation at http://www.micemn.net/participants.html reflect that the RR's are now using BFD? Good idea. Done. > And maybe it can be noted on PeeringDB, too. I don't know who has the PeeringDB login. Jay? -- Richard

Jan. 1, 2018

Re: Passive BFD support on Route-Server #1

by Richard Laager

I have emailed their support address for help. -- Richard > On Dec 30, 2017, at 09:55, Jason Hanke <jayhanke(a)NEUTRALPATH.NET> wrote: > > I haven't been able to update the mice entry for peeringdb for quite some time. > > It might be a good idea for one of the board members or tech members to get added as a contact as well. > >> On Dec 29, 2017 11:13 PM, "Richard Laager" <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: >> I haven't been able to update the mice entry in peeringdb for quite some time. >> >> It might be a good idea for one of the board members or tech members to get set up as the contact. >> >>> On Dec 29, 2017 11:13 PM, "Richard Laager" <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: >>> On 12/29/2017 09:38 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: >>> > Can the documentation at http://www.micemn.net/participants.html reflect that the RR's are now using BFD? >>> >>> Good idea. Done. >>> >>> > And maybe it can be noted on PeeringDB, too. >>> >>> I don't know who has the PeeringDB login. Jay? >>> >>> -- >>> Richard > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 30, 2017

Re: Passive BFD support on Route-Server #1

by Jason Hanke

I haven't been able to update the mice entry for peeringdb for quite some time. It might be a good idea for one of the board members or tech members to get added as a contact as well. On Dec 29, 2017 11:13 PM, "Richard Laager" <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: > I haven't been able to update the mice entry in peeringdb for quite some > time. > > It might be a good idea for one of the board members or tech members to > get set up as the contact. > > On Dec 29, 2017 11:13 PM, "Richard Laager" <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: > >> On 12/29/2017 09:38 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: >> > Can the documentation at http://www.micemn.net/participants.html >> reflect that the RR's are now using BFD? >> >> Good idea. Done. >> >> > And maybe it can be noted on PeeringDB, too. >> >> I don't know who has the PeeringDB login. Jay? >> >> -- >> Richard >> >

Dec. 30, 2017