- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Re: MICE Equipment Diagram

by Jeremy Lumby

I agree that the ON LOAN notation is the only one that should be there since it is a technical document, and we need to plan to give it back as soon as we can feasibly upgrade out of it. -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 12:58 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Equipment Diagram While I certainly appreciate the donations and absolutely support crediting donors (which we do on the website), I don't see a need to list them on the diagram, since it has no technical bearing. I think there is some value to keeping the "on loan" notation for the one switch. On 11/14/2016 01:07 PM, Doug McIntyre wrote: > There is one other thing that could be added. There is also a "looking > glass/route view" router setup that is hanging off ge-0/0/0 on the > 1G switch stack. Sure, why not. DNS names would definitely be nice: > It's DNS name is lg.micemn.net. > > I call the 10G switch stack 'core-sw1.micemn.net', and the 1G switch stack > 'core-sw2.micemn.net'. These DNS names are in place. I'll definitely get this on the website. But we really should have the original source too, not just the PDF. If you want the easy way, just email me both files. If you want to do all the work yourself, you could submit a pull request against the repository: https://github.com/rlaager/mice-website -- Richard

Nov. 15, 2016

Re: MICE Equipment Diagram

by Richard Laager

While I certainly appreciate the donations and absolutely support crediting donors (which we do on the website), I don't see a need to list them on the diagram, since it has no technical bearing. I think there is some value to keeping the "on loan" notation for the one switch. On 11/14/2016 01:07 PM, Doug McIntyre wrote: > There is one other thing that could be added. There is also a "looking > glass/route view" router setup that is hanging off ge-0/0/0 on the > 1G switch stack. Sure, why not. DNS names would definitely be nice: > It's DNS name is lg.micemn.net. > > I call the 10G switch stack 'core-sw1.micemn.net', and the 1G switch stack > 'core-sw2.micemn.net'. These DNS names are in place. I'll definitely get this on the website. But we really should have the original source too, not just the PDF. If you want the easy way, just email me both files. If you want to do all the work yourself, you could submit a pull request against the repository: https://github.com/rlaager/mice-website -- Richard

Nov. 15, 2016

Re: MICE Equipment Diagram

by Nevin Lyne

> You could note who donated the route server hardware. I believe Arcustech > did one, and Implex did one, and maybe ipHouse had one of them in the mix? > I left spare hardware down there ready to plug in if ever needed to. > Lots of people offered, so sorry if I don't remember right. We initially donated two servers for the route servers, and I believe donated either parts or another one to replace a failing one at some point. I would have to look back in emails with Doug to confirm. -Nevin -- Nevin Lyne -- Founder & Director of Technology -- Arcustech, LLC. - arcustech.com -- Gippy's Internet Solutions, LLC. - enginehosting.com

Nov. 14, 2016

Re: MICE Equipment Diagram

by Doug McIntyre

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 12:29:42PM -0600, Mike Johnston wrote: > Attached is a diagram that I have have built depicting the MICE equipment > and the remote switches. I have included a few notes provided by Jeremy. I > have also included port and LAG descriptors, which I was able to obtain from > list archives, the website, and cacti. > 1) Is it accurate? Please elaborate if not. It looks to be for me. There is one other thing that could be added. There is also a "looking glass/route view" router setup that is hanging off ge-0/0/0 on the 1G switch stack. It's DNS name is lg.micemn.net. If you wanted to note who donated it, it was MNVoIP. I call the 10G switch stack 'core-sw1.micemn.net', and the 1G switch stack 'core-sw2.micemn.net'. These DNS names are in place. You could note who donated the route server hardware. I believe Arcustech did one, and Implex did one, and maybe ipHouse had one of them in the mix? I left spare hardware down there ready to plug in if ever needed to. Lots of people offered, so sorry if I don't remember right. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Nov. 14, 2016

MICE Equipment Diagram

by Mike Johnston

Attached is a diagram that I have have built depicting the MICE equipment and the remote switches. I have included a few notes provided by Jeremy. I have also included port and LAG descriptors, which I was able to obtain from list archives, the website, and cacti. This diagram is mostly intended to be a visual aid when having technical discussion. Diagramming individual participants was not included in the scope of this project. I am interested in constructive feedback, specifically: 1) Is it accurate? Please elaborate if not. 2) Is anything missing that is important to note? For example, is it important to note the management interfaces of the Route Servers? Obviously, we can only put so much information on a single sheet of paper. 3) Is anything not completely obvious? If not, then I need better notes, a key/legend, etc.. Thanks, Mike Johnston Wikstrom Telephone Company

Nov. 14, 2016

Re: Traffic Drop

by Jason Hanke

Neutral Path had a fiber cut just south of our MSP1 site (in Belle Plaine) about 1 pm yesterday. It looks like there was a bunch of CDN-ish traffic surge during the day. On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 8:45 PM, Ben Wiechman <ben.wiechman(a)arvig.com> wrote: > We had some unusual traffic patterns this afternoon too. A huge surge, with > a massive dip early evening and now traffic appears to be flowing at fairly > typical levels. Weird. > > > Ben Wiechman > Network Engineer IV | Arvig > Direct: 320.256.0184 > Cell: 320.247.3224 > Office: 320.256.7471 > ben.wiechman(a)arvig.com > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com> wrote: >> >> I noticed a huge drop in MICE traffic, and was wondering if there was a >> fiber cut somewhere, or some other underlying reason for the drop off. > > > > ________________________________ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=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

Nov. 10, 2016

Re: Traffic Drop

by Ben Wiechman

We had some unusual traffic patterns this afternoon too. A huge surge, with a massive dip early evening and now traffic appears to be flowing at fairly typical levels. Weird. Ben Wiechman Network Engineer IV | Arvig Direct: 320.256.0184 Cell: 320.247.3224 Office: 320.256.7471 ben.wiechman(a)arvig.com On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com> wrote: > I noticed a huge drop in MICE traffic, and was wondering if there was a > fiber cut somewhere, or some other underlying reason for the drop off. >

Nov. 10, 2016

Traffic Drop

by Jeremy Lumby

I noticed a huge drop in MICE traffic, and was wondering if there was a fiber cut somewhere, or some other underlying reason for the drop off.

Nov. 10, 2016

Re: UG21 Minutes and Attendance Notes

by Ben Wiechman

Were there any additional details regarding these issues? Do these issues begin to affect all traffic (some kind of queue exhaustion) or are they typically only experienced when passing traffic from the high bandwidth 100G links to the "low" bandwidth 1G links, or vice versa? Ben Wiechman Network Engineer IV | Arvig Direct: 320.256.0184 Cell: 320.247.3224 Office: 320.256.7471 ben.wiechman(a)arvig.com On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:52 PM, anthonyanderberg(a)nu-telecom.net < anthonyanderberg(a)nu-telecom.net> wrote: > I think Jay’s point was that our smaller members have 1G interfaces and > we’re talking about the next generation of switch having 100G interfaces. > I bet many of us had similar queue experiences with older platforms during > our early 10G migrations, and larger exchanges that are at the 100G level > may be seeing queue drops in even modern hardware. So we’ll want to > interrogate potential switch vendors and be mindful of the issue. Sorry > if that wasn’t clear. > > > > Cheers, > > anthony > > > > *Anthony Anderberg* > > Sr. Systems Analyst > > [image: NUtel_email_logo_1] > > 320-234-5239 > > anthonyanderberg(a)nu-telecom.net > > *www.nutelecom.net <http://www.nutelecom.net>* > > > > *From:* MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] *On Behalf > Of *Frank Bulk > *Sent:* Saturday, November 05, 2016 7:23 PM > *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > *Subject:* Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] UG21 Minutes and Attendance Notes > > > > From the minutes: > > “Jay Hanke commented that other exchanges have reported their switch’s > internal queues overflowing when there was more than 2 orders of difference > in the traffic volume between the largest and smallest members.“ > > > > How do we go about measuring for that? > > > > Frank > > > > *From:* MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] *On Behalf > Of *anthonyanderberg(a)nu-telecom.net > *Sent:* Friday, November 04, 2016 1:33 PM > *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > *Subject:* [MICE-DISCUSS] UG21 Minutes and Attendance Notes > > > > My minutes and attendance log from our last UG meeting are attached. > > > > Cheers, > > anthony > > > > > > *Anthony Anderberg* > > Sr. Systems Analyst > > [image: NUtel_email_logo_1] > > 320-234-5239 > > anthonyanderberg(a)nu-telecom.net > > *www.nutelecom.net <http://www.nutelecom.net>* > > > > > ------------------------------ > > 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 >

Nov. 8, 2016

Re: UG21 Minutes and Attendance Notes

by anthonyanderberg＠nu-telecom.net

I think Jay's point was that our smaller members have 1G interfaces and we're talking about the next generation of switch having 100G interfaces. I bet many of us had similar queue experiences with older platforms during our early 10G migrations, and larger exchanges that are at the 100G level may be seeing queue drops in even modern hardware. So we'll want to interrogate potential switch vendors and be mindful of the issue. Sorry if that wasn't clear. Cheers, anthony Anthony Anderberg Sr. Systems Analyst [NUtel_email_logo_1] 320-234-5239 anthonyanderberg(a)nu-telecom.net<mailto:anthonyanderberg@nu-telecom.net> www.nutelecom.net<http://www.nutelecom.net> From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Frank Bulk Sent: Saturday, November 05, 2016 7:23 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] UG21 Minutes and Attendance Notes >From the minutes: "Jay Hanke commented that other exchanges have reported their switch's internal queues overflowing when there was more than 2 orders of difference in the traffic volume between the largest and smallest members." How do we go about measuring for that? Frank From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of anthonyanderberg(a)nu-telecom.net Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 1:33 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] UG21 Minutes and Attendance Notes My minutes and attendance log from our last UG meeting are attached. Cheers, anthony Anthony Anderberg Sr. Systems Analyst [NUtel_email_logo_1] 320-234-5239 anthonyanderberg(a)nu-telecom.net<mailto:anthonyanderberg@nu-telecom.net> www.nutelecom.net<http://www.nutelecom.net> ________________________________ 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

Nov. 8, 2016

Re: UG21 Minutes and Attendance Notes

by Frank Bulk

>From the minutes: "Jay Hanke commented that other exchanges have reported their switch's internal queues overflowing when there was more than 2 orders of difference in the traffic volume between the largest and smallest members." How do we go about measuring for that? Frank From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of anthonyanderberg(a)nu-telecom.net Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 1:33 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] UG21 Minutes and Attendance Notes My minutes and attendance log from our last UG meeting are attached. Cheers, anthony Anthony Anderberg Sr. Systems Analyst [NUtel_email_logo_1] 320-234-5239 anthonyanderberg(a)nu-telecom.net<mailto:anthonyanderberg@nu-telecom.net> www.nutelecom.net<http://www.nutelecom.net> ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Nov. 6, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Ben Wiechman

A Brocade ICX7750 with a similar port density is also potentially a similar cost. Havent compared feature set between those. The recent Broadcom announcement muddies that water a bit as well. On Oct 28, 2016 10:33 AM, "Andrew Hoyos" <hoyosa(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Oct 28, 2016, at 10:30 AM, Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> wrote: > > > >> I have to assume that regardless they are expensive. > > > > Actually, I think the QFX5200-32C is pretty reasonable price, and I > think one > > to shoot for, although watch out pricing it as hardware & software are > seperate > > line items. But in some ways, that is good, as this application doesn't > need > > VxLAN and EVPN or all the fancy new things. > > QFX5100-48 can be had for 48 port 10g density as well for like $6k NFR > with the right Juniper partner (hint hint). > Depending on direction the group wants to go as far as a new fabric and > timing, I may even have one we would be willing to donate to the cause. > > -- > Andrew Hoyos > hoyosa(a)gmail.com >

Nov. 5, 2016

Re: UG21 Minutes and Attendance Notes

by Richard Laager

On 11/04/2016 07:33 PM, anthonyanderberg(a)nu-telecom.net wrote: > My minutes and attendance log from our last UG meeting are attached. Thanks! I've posted them to the website. -- Richard

Nov. 5, 2016

UG21 Minutes and Attendance Notes

by anthonyanderberg＠nu-telecom.net

My minutes and attendance log from our last UG meeting are attached. Cheers, anthony Anthony Anderberg Sr. Systems Analyst [NUtel_email_logo_1] 320-234-5239 anthonyanderberg(a)nu-telecom.net<mailto:anthonyanderberg@nu-telecom.net> www.nutelecom.net<http://www.nutelecom.net>

Nov. 4, 2016

Re: Packet loss issue update

by Jeremy Lumby

I was just looking over all of the data I collected over the weekend. It looks as if we still have about 0.03% loss when traffic is going between the 4500, and the 4550. I am not well versed in proprietary Juniper stuff, however do we know if we have the capacity to shut down 1 stacking port at a time, and retest the loss? Jeremy -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Jason Hanke Sent: Monday, October 31, 2016 3:53 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Packet loss issue update Do we have an update on the minor packet loss issue after all the upgrades have been completed? -- 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

Oct. 31, 2016

Packet loss issue update

by Jason Hanke

Do we have an update on the minor packet loss issue after all the upgrades have been completed? -- 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

Oct. 31, 2016

Cacti graph showing count of MICE peers and prefixes

by Frank Bulk

The Cacti graph showing the number of MICE peers and prefixes has been blank since September 28 around 3 pm. Is there a way to get that back? Frank

Oct. 29, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Doug McIntyre

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 04:10:35PM +0000, Shaun Carlson wrote: > While I like the idea of having some sort of tech list for deep discussions amongst those with specific access, I think we also need to keep the open nature of the exchange in mind to ensure we're not accidentally excluding someone or creating barriers to communication and collaboration in the process. I actually have a MICE-TECH list already setup, and I feed the RANCID config diffs into it. I've restricted its' membership to just the tech committee and have generally pushed anybody that found it to go talk on MICE-DISCUSS anyway. There's hardly anything that happens on it other than config diffs. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Richard Laager

On 10/28/2016 11:10 AM, Shaun Carlson wrote: > While I like the idea of having some sort of tech list for deep > discussions amongst those with specific access, I think we also need to > keep the open nature of the exchange in mind to ensure we're not > accidentally excluding someone or creating barriers to communication and > collaboration in the process. The alternative is off-list emails, which is what already happens. A mailing list brings an archive. -- Richard

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Mike Horwath

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 04:10:35PM +0000, Shaun Carlson wrote: > While I like the idea of having some sort of tech list for deep > discussions amongst those with specific access, I think we also need > to keep the open nature of the exchange in mind to ensure we're not > accidentally excluding someone or creating barriers to communication > and collaboration in the process. My question in return: why can't those discussions happen on -DISCUSS? Just playing *advocate here. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Shaun Carlson

While I like the idea of having some sort of tech list for deep discussions amongst those with specific access, I think we also need to keep the open nature of the exchange in mind to ensure we're not accidentally excluding someone or creating barriers to communication and collaboration in the process. S Shaun Carlson Director of Information Technology | Arvig ph: (218) 346.8673 | em: shaun.carlson(a)arvig.com On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 9:57 AM -0500, "Richard Laager" <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: On 10/28/2016 09:45 AM, Mike Horwath wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 01:56:32PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote: >> 3) asking for a MICE-TECH and/or MICE-OPS list be created (depending >> on whether we have distinct groups and what those people want). I >> expect at least one list will be closed to members only. > > Give the word and it can be done. > > Hell both could be done though they seem a little redundant in naming. :) There may be a need to have one list for people with actual access to the equipment and a separate list for another set of users. But before we go there, I need to have more discussions with people who might be on those lists. -- Richard

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Andrew Hoyos

> On Oct 28, 2016, at 10:30 AM, Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> wrote: > >> I have to assume that regardless they are expensive. > > Actually, I think the QFX5200-32C is pretty reasonable price, and I think one > to shoot for, although watch out pricing it as hardware & software are seperate > line items. But in some ways, that is good, as this application doesn't need > VxLAN and EVPN or all the fancy new things. QFX5100-48 can be had for 48 port 10g density as well for like $6k NFR with the right Juniper partner (hint hint). Depending on direction the group wants to go as far as a new fabric and timing, I may even have one we would be willing to donate to the cause. -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Doug McIntyre

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 09:53:02AM -0500, Mike Horwath wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 02:07:39PM -0500, Doug McIntyre wrote: > > The QFX5200-32C can get into newer technologies like adding 25G/50G > > and 100G capable ports. Again using breakout cables to breakout ports > > into the "slower" speeds we are running, and can get into the range of > > 128 x 10GB ports with breakout cables in 1U. .. > I have to assume that regardless they are expensive. Actually, I think the QFX5200-32C is pretty reasonable price, and I think one to shoot for, although watch out pricing it as hardware & software are seperate line items. But in some ways, that is good, as this application doesn't need VxLAN and EVPN or all the fancy new things. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Mike Horwath

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 09:57:19AM -0500, Richard Laager wrote: > There may be a need to have one list for people with actual access > to the equipment and a separate list for another set of users. But > before we go there, I need to have more discussions with people who > might be on those lists. Oh that idea was bandied about back in month-one of MICE. Once you have an idea just reach out to me. I maintain the MICE-* lists still (and Doug recently helped with something that had been missed. ewps) -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Oct. 28, 2016

Re: MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT

by Richard Laager

On 10/28/2016 09:45 AM, Mike Horwath wrote: > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 01:56:32PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote: >> 3) asking for a MICE-TECH and/or MICE-OPS list be created (depending >> on whether we have distinct groups and what those people want). I >> expect at least one list will be closed to members only. > > Give the word and it can be done. > > Hell both could be done though they seem a little redundant in naming. :) There may be a need to have one list for people with actual access to the equipment and a separate list for another set of users. But before we go there, I need to have more discussions with people who might be on those lists. -- Richard

Oct. 28, 2016