- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Re: New Switch Proposal

by Frank Bulk

Couldn't that port be configured to allow all MACs in advance of the cut, and then tightened down again afterwards? Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Owen DeLong Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 8:24 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] New Switch Proposal What is the perceived benefit of doing this? The down-side is that whenever anyone has to replace a line card or do an equipment swap, they need to coordinate with someone who can update the port security on the switch. Worse, they need to remember that's an issue at the time or figure it out through a (not terribly convenient) troubleshooting process. Owen Sent from my iPad On Dec 23, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Jay Hanke <jayhanke(a)MANKATONETWORKS.NET> wrote: > I have purchased a new EX 2200 switch for the Mankato Networks rack. > The new switch will be dedicated and will enable traffic stats for > those connected to my switch. > > As a trial, I plan to enable port security on the downstream access > ports limiting the port to one learned mac-address. The port security > mechanism is the same on the EX 2200 as the EX 4200 so if successful, > a similar strategy could be applied to the main switch. > > The uplink to the main switch will remain the same. > > Pending feedback, I'm planning to perform the move sometime in early January. > > Thanks, > > Jay > > ######################################################################## > > 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

Dec. 27, 2011

Re: New Switch Proposal

by Frank Bulk

Depending on the transport, the interface at the IX switch may not go down when the MICE participant swaps out their equipment. Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Justin Krejci Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2011 8:36 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] New Switch Proposal I don't see how anyone needs to update anything. Once the dynamically learned old mac address ages out the new one could be learned or perhaps as soon as the interface goes down the dynamically learned mac address is flushed depending on how it works on Junos. -----Original Message----- From: Owen DeLong <owend(a)HE.NET> Sender: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 09:24:03 To: <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Reply-To: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] New Switch Proposal What is the perceived benefit of doing this? The down-side is that whenever anyone has to replace a line card or do an equipment swap, they need to coordinate with someone who can update the port security on the switch. Worse, they need to remember that's an issue at the time or figure it out through a (not terribly convenient) troubleshooting process. Owen Sent from my iPad On Dec 23, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Jay Hanke <jayhanke(a)MANKATONETWORKS.NET> wrote: > I have purchased a new EX 2200 switch for the Mankato Networks rack. > The new switch will be dedicated and will enable traffic stats for > those connected to my switch. > > As a trial, I plan to enable port security on the downstream access > ports limiting the port to one learned mac-address. The port security > mechanism is the same on the EX 2200 as the EX 4200 so if successful, > a similar strategy could be applied to the main switch. > > The uplink to the main switch will remain the same. > > Pending feedback, I'm planning to perform the move sometime in early January. > > Thanks, > > Jay > > ######################################################################## > > 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 ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 27, 2011

Re: New Switch Proposal

by Jay Hanke

On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Mike Horwath <drechsau(a)iphouse.net> wrote: > If this is done can we get DNS turned on again? U talking about reverse? It's working but some of the newer participants need to be added. Jay ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: New Switch Proposal

by Mike Horwath

If this is done can we get DNS turned on again? Traceroute by name >> by IP for humans and their word memories, and each DNS server can issue different results, ya know? And I like a good argument... -- Mike Horwath via iPad 2, electric boogaloo! ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: New Switch Proposal

by Andrew Hoyos

On Dec 22, 2011, at 10:26 PM, Doug McIntyre wrote: > On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 09:17:08PM -0600, Andrew Hoyos wrote: >> On Dec 22, 2011, at 9:01 PM, Doug McIntyre wrote: >> >>> mac address limiting to tiny numbers, especially qty 1 won't work. >>> There are a lot of administrative packets that go across a link coming >>> from specific well-known MAC addresses, if that administrative packet >>> gets in before any real traffic, that administrative MAC address will >>> be learned and real traffic locked out. >>> >>> (this is mentioned in the JunOS documentation). >>> >> >> That's why you get those 'administrative packets' to not happen in the first place. >> No offense, but I don't want to see your cdp/lldp, ospf, stp, keepalives, etc. coming across the IX. > > There are other protocols that do take more than one MAC address that > some people might find required. For example, a JunOS RVI has two MAC > adddresses, the port address, and the RVI MAC address. I assume > a Cisco SVI would be the same, although I haven't dug into it. Yes, but if the switchport is properly configured, no frames should be emitted with the switchport mac address. We should only see the RVI/SVI mac addr. > Cisco UDLD also does broadcasts using a well-known MAC address. UDLD is proprietary, and most (if not all now?) of the exchange appears to be running on Juniper equipment, so it's not of much use to run anyway. 'udld disable' fixes that up. > I don't think it would be allowed anyway at the IX, but LACP and PAgP > are also ones to talk on different MAC addresses to setup the LAG before > talking real traffic. I'm sure there is some working config we could come up with in that case, if a participant did want LACP. I'd be curious if vendor implementations actually factor in the LACP packets to mac addr limits, since it's port to port, and they really don't transit outside of that. The only reason I'm pushing this too, is as the exchange grows, and more unfiltered layer2 traffic (and broken downstream L2 devices) enter the exchange, it *can* and *will* have a negative effect, as we've already seen once before. The model works well for IX's like Equinix, TIE, SIX, AMSIX, etc. I don't see a reason why it can't work here too, and prevent future issues. -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: New Switch Proposal

by Doug McIntyre

On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 09:17:08PM -0600, Andrew Hoyos wrote: > On Dec 22, 2011, at 9:01 PM, Doug McIntyre wrote: > > > mac address limiting to tiny numbers, especially qty 1 won't work. > > There are a lot of administrative packets that go across a link coming > > from specific well-known MAC addresses, if that administrative packet > > gets in before any real traffic, that administrative MAC address will > > be learned and real traffic locked out. > > > > (this is mentioned in the JunOS documentation). > > > > That's why you get those 'administrative packets' to not happen in the first place. > No offense, but I don't want to see your cdp/lldp, ospf, stp, keepalives, etc. coming across the IX. There are other protocols that do take more than one MAC address that some people might find required. For example, a JunOS RVI has two MAC adddresses, the port address, and the RVI MAC address. I assume a Cisco SVI would be the same, although I haven't dug into it. Cisco UDLD also does broadcasts using a well-known MAC address. I don't think it would be allowed anyway at the IX, but LACP and PAgP are also ones to talk on different MAC addresses to setup the LAG before talking real traffic. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> -- ipHouse/Goldengate/Bitstream/ProNS -- Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: New Switch Proposal

by Andrew Hoyos

On Dec 22, 2011, at 9:01 PM, Doug McIntyre wrote: > mac address limiting to tiny numbers, especially qty 1 won't work. > There are a lot of administrative packets that go across a link coming > from specific well-known MAC addresses, if that administrative packet > gets in before any real traffic, that administrative MAC address will > be learned and real traffic locked out. > > (this is mentioned in the JunOS documentation). > That's why you get those 'administrative packets' to not happen in the first place. No offense, but I don't want to see your cdp/lldp, ospf, stp, keepalives, etc. coming across the IX. On an IX, realistically, we should only be seeing one router/mac address per port, and only IP traffic from said router. AMSIX has a good guide on how to make your devices be quiet for most platforms, here: http://www.ams-ix.net/config-guide/ Now, I could see making exceptions for devices which don't seem to have a way to be quiet, but in 99% of the cases here, a few lines of config can avoid this problem. -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: New Switch Proposal

by Andrew Hoyos

Owen - were you thinking 'sticky-mac' style config, where you must have someone manually config a mac address allowed list for the port? That's not what Jay is suggesting here. On Dec 22, 2011, at 8:41 PM, Jay Hanke wrote: > The benefit is it will block traffic from other mac addresses in the event of a loop or other misconfiguration. The learned mac address will clear automatically when the port goes down so it should not require admin assistance. > > On Dec 22, 2011 8:28 PM, "Owen DeLong" <owend(a)he.net> wrote: > What is the perceived benefit of doing this? The down-side is that whenever anyone has to replace a line card or do an equipment swap, they need to coordinate with someone who can update the port security on the switch. Worse, they need to remember that's an issue at the time or figure it out through a (not terribly convenient) troubleshooting process. > > Owen > > > Sent from my iPad > > On Dec 23, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Jay Hanke <jayhanke(a)MANKATONETWORKS.NET> wrote: > > > I have purchased a new EX 2200 switch for the Mankato Networks rack. > > The new switch will be dedicated and will enable traffic stats for > > those connected to my switch. > > > > As a trial, I plan to enable port security on the downstream access > > ports limiting the port to one learned mac-address. The port security > > mechanism is the same on the EX 2200 as the EX 4200 so if successful, > > a similar strategy could be applied to the main switch. > > > > The uplink to the main switch will remain the same. > > > > Pending feedback, I'm planning to perform the move sometime in early January. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jay > > > > ######################################################################## > > > > 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 > -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: New Switch Proposal

by Doug McIntyre

mac address limiting to tiny numbers, especially qty 1 won't work. There are a lot of administrative packets that go across a link coming from specific well-known MAC addresses, if that administrative packet gets in before any real traffic, that administrative MAC address will be learned and real traffic locked out. (this is mentioned in the JunOS documentation). mac-address limiting is mainly used for untrusted environments such that you are protecting the switch from having its CAM table blasted out turning the switch into broadcast all packets down all ports mode since its CAM table is full. Then the attacker can sniff for traffic they are looking for, hopefully grabbing the traffic they are trying to intercept before the hardware CPU pegged at 100% signals the NOC that something is amiss and they start looking for what is going on. In practice, in such an untrusted environment( untrusted site, untrusted ports, with max of one device per user. ), I found that at a minimum 3 MAC address limit was the practical smallest size I could go, with typically a range of 5 to 10. Otherwise, administrative and other weird packets would shut down the ports due to flase security alerts all the time, and it wasn't practical to have such low limits. On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 08:41:47PM -0600, Jay Hanke wrote: > The benefit is it will block traffic from other mac addresses in the event > of a loop or other misconfiguration. The learned mac address will clear > automatically when the port goes down so it should not require admin > assistance. > On Dec 22, 2011 8:28 PM, "Owen DeLong" <owend(a)he.net> wrote: > > > What is the perceived benefit of doing this? The down-side is that > > whenever anyone has to replace a line card or do an equipment swap, they > > need to coordinate with someone who can update the port security on the > > switch. Worse, they need to remember that's an issue at the time or figure > > it out through a (not terribly convenient) troubleshooting process. > > > > Owen > > > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > > On Dec 23, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Jay Hanke <jayhanke(a)MANKATONETWORKS.NET> > > wrote: > > > > > I have purchased a new EX 2200 switch for the Mankato Networks rack. > > > The new switch will be dedicated and will enable traffic stats for > > > those connected to my switch. > > > > > > As a trial, I plan to enable port security on the downstream access > > > ports limiting the port to one learned mac-address. The port security > > > mechanism is the same on the EX 2200 as the EX 4200 so if successful, > > > a similar strategy could be applied to the main switch. > > > > > > The uplink to the main switch will remain the same. > > > > > > Pending feedback, I'm planning to perform the move sometime in early > > January. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Jay > > > > > > ######################################################################## > > > > > > 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 -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> -- ipHouse/Goldengate/Bitstream/ProNS -- Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: New Switch Proposal

by Jay Hanke

The benefit is it will block traffic from other mac addresses in the event of a loop or other misconfiguration. The learned mac address will clear automatically when the port goes down so it should not require admin assistance. On Dec 22, 2011 8:28 PM, "Owen DeLong" <owend(a)he.net> wrote: > What is the perceived benefit of doing this? The down-side is that > whenever anyone has to replace a line card or do an equipment swap, they > need to coordinate with someone who can update the port security on the > switch. Worse, they need to remember that's an issue at the time or figure > it out through a (not terribly convenient) troubleshooting process. > > Owen > > > Sent from my iPad > > On Dec 23, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Jay Hanke <jayhanke(a)MANKATONETWORKS.NET> > wrote: > > > I have purchased a new EX 2200 switch for the Mankato Networks rack. > > The new switch will be dedicated and will enable traffic stats for > > those connected to my switch. > > > > As a trial, I plan to enable port security on the downstream access > > ports limiting the port to one learned mac-address. The port security > > mechanism is the same on the EX 2200 as the EX 4200 so if successful, > > a similar strategy could be applied to the main switch. > > > > The uplink to the main switch will remain the same. > > > > Pending feedback, I'm planning to perform the move sometime in early > January. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jay > > > > ######################################################################## > > > > 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

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: New Switch Proposal

by Justin Krejci

I don't see how anyone needs to update anything. Once the dynamically learned old mac address ages out the new one could be learned or perhaps as soon as the interface goes down the dynamically learned mac address is flushed depending on how it works on Junos. -----Original Message----- From: Owen DeLong <owend(a)HE.NET> Sender: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 09:24:03 To: <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Reply-To: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] New Switch Proposal What is the perceived benefit of doing this? The down-side is that whenever anyone has to replace a line card or do an equipment swap, they need to coordinate with someone who can update the port security on the switch. Worse, they need to remember that's an issue at the time or figure it out through a (not terribly convenient) troubleshooting process. Owen Sent from my iPad On Dec 23, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Jay Hanke <jayhanke(a)MANKATONETWORKS.NET> wrote: > I have purchased a new EX 2200 switch for the Mankato Networks rack. > The new switch will be dedicated and will enable traffic stats for > those connected to my switch. > > As a trial, I plan to enable port security on the downstream access > ports limiting the port to one learned mac-address. The port security > mechanism is the same on the EX 2200 as the EX 4200 so if successful, > a similar strategy could be applied to the main switch. > > The uplink to the main switch will remain the same. > > Pending feedback, I'm planning to perform the move sometime in early January. > > Thanks, > > Jay > > ######################################################################## > > 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

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: New Switch Proposal

by Owen DeLong

What is the perceived benefit of doing this? The down-side is that whenever anyone has to replace a line card or do an equipment swap, they need to coordinate with someone who can update the port security on the switch. Worse, they need to remember that's an issue at the time or figure it out through a (not terribly convenient) troubleshooting process. Owen Sent from my iPad On Dec 23, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Jay Hanke <jayhanke(a)MANKATONETWORKS.NET> wrote: > I have purchased a new EX 2200 switch for the Mankato Networks rack. > The new switch will be dedicated and will enable traffic stats for > those connected to my switch. > > As a trial, I plan to enable port security on the downstream access > ports limiting the port to one learned mac-address. The port security > mechanism is the same on the EX 2200 as the EX 4200 so if successful, > a similar strategy could be applied to the main switch. > > The uplink to the main switch will remain the same. > > Pending feedback, I'm planning to perform the move sometime in early January. > > Thanks, > > Jay > > ######################################################################## > > 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

Dec. 23, 2011

New Switch Proposal

by Jay Hanke

I have purchased a new EX 2200 switch for the Mankato Networks rack. The new switch will be dedicated and will enable traffic stats for those connected to my switch. As a trial, I plan to enable port security on the downstream access ports limiting the port to one learned mac-address. The port security mechanism is the same on the EX 2200 as the EX 4200 so if successful, a similar strategy could be applied to the main switch. The uplink to the main switch will remain the same. Pending feedback, I'm planning to perform the move sometime in early January. Thanks, Jay ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 22, 2011

MICE CNS Switch downtime

by Steve Howard

Hello, CNS will be converting its MICE switch from AC to DC power and moving the switch to a new cabinet on the morning of 12/23 starting around 5:00AM. Service is expected to be down for about 15 minutes for members that are connected to that switch. This will affect MICE connectivity to the following MICE members: CNS Hurricane Electric Northern Lights GigaPOP/Univ of Minnesota Paul Bunyan Communications Wikstrom Telephone I'm sorry for the inconvenience. If you have any questions/issues, feel free to send me e-mail. Thanks, Steve ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 20, 2011

Re: Akamai Memory

by Jeremy Lumby

Sure, not a problem. I have more equipment of my own going into 511 in the next week or so, so I will be there quite a bit. -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Jay Hanke Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2011 8:37 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Akamai Memory Can someone swap some memory in one of the Akamai servers in the next couple of days? Jay ######################################################################## 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

Dec. 15, 2011

Akamai Memory

by Jay Hanke

Can someone swap some memory in one of the Akamai servers in the next couple of days? Jay ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 15, 2011

Packet Clearing House (PCH.net) entry

by Bradley Urberg-Carlson

I noticed an entry for MICE on Bill Woodcock's Packet Clearinghouse site (https://prefix.pch.net/applications/ixpdir/detail.php?exchange_point_id=1265) Whichever helpful member created the entry, could you update the traffic stats there to show >1gbps, and link to MICE's public traffic graph? ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 12, 2011

Re: Spiralight port add

by Andrew Hoyos

Working on cross connects and equipment the next few weeks - Spiralight should be ready to peer in a few weeks. Thanks! Andrew On Dec 8, 2011, at 4:05 PM, Doug McIntyre wrote: > On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 02:32:49PM -0600, Jay Hanke wrote: >> Spiralight >> ge-0/0/12 (Main Switch, copper) >> ASN 33125 >> 69.147.218.12/24 >> 2607:fe10:ffff::12/64 >> andrew(a)hoyosconsulting.com >> Please add them to the route servers. > > > Sure, they are all set on the route servers once they plug into their port. > > -- > Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> > -- ipHouse/Goldengate/Bitstream/ProNS -- > Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades > > ######################################################################## > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 8, 2011

Re: Spiralight port add

by Doug McIntyre

On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 02:32:49PM -0600, Jay Hanke wrote: > Spiralight > ge-0/0/12 (Main Switch, copper) > ASN 33125 > 69.147.218.12/24 > 2607:fe10:ffff::12/64 > andrew(a)hoyosconsulting.com > Please add them to the route servers. Sure, they are all set on the route servers once they plug into their port. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> -- ipHouse/Goldengate/Bitstream/ProNS -- Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 8, 2011

Re: New Arvig Port Assignment

by David Farmer

Thanks for the update. And Include the University of Minnesota and Northern Lights GigaPOP and someone else eagerly awaiting an opportunity to peer with you. On 12/8/11 13:09 CST, Shaun Carlson wrote: > Not yet Martin, > > We have equipment on order and will likely be getting things in place in > the January time frame. > > s > > // SIGNED // > Shaun Carlson > Senior Network Engineer > Arvig Communications Systems > ph: (218) 346-8673 > em: shaun.carlson(a)arvig.com <mailto:shaun.carlson@arvig.com> > contact: protocol.by/scarlson <http://protocol.by/scarlson> > > > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 13:08, Hannigan, Martin <marty(a)akamai.com > <mailto:marty@akamai.com>> wrote: > > Is Avrig live yet and ready for peers? > > Best, > > -M< > > > > > On 11/21/11 11:28 AM, "Jay Hanke" <jayhanke(a)MANKATONETWORKS.NET > <mailto:jayhanke@MANKATONETWORKS.NET>> wrote: > > > Arvig > > Port Main switch 7 (copper) > > 69.147.218.7/24 <http://69.147.218.7/24> > > 2607:fe10:ffff::7/64 > > We need your contact info and ASN. Also please update your peeringDB > > information. > > > > Thanks and welcome aboard! > > ######################################################################## > > 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> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > 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> > -- =============================================== 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

Dec. 8, 2011

Spiralight port add

by Jay Hanke

Spiralight ge-0/0/12 (Main Switch, copper) ASN 33125 69.147.218.12/24 2607:fe10:ffff::12/64 andrew(a)hoyosconsulting.com Please add them to the route servers. Thanks and welcome aboard! Jay ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 8, 2011

Re: New Arvig Port Assignment

by Shaun Carlson

Not yet Martin, We have equipment on order and will likely be getting things in place in the January time frame. s // SIGNED // Shaun Carlson Senior Network Engineer Arvig Communications Systems ph: (218) 346-8673 em: shaun.carlson(a)arvig.com contact: protocol.by/scarlson On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 13:08, Hannigan, Martin <marty(a)akamai.com> wrote: > Is Avrig live yet and ready for peers? > > Best, > > -M< > > > > > On 11/21/11 11:28 AM, "Jay Hanke" <jayhanke(a)MANKATONETWORKS.NET> wrote: > > > Arvig > > Port Main switch 7 (copper) > > 69.147.218.7/24 > > 2607:fe10:ffff::7/64 > > We need your contact info and ASN. Also please update your peeringDB > > information. > > > > Thanks and welcome aboard! > > ######################################################################## > > 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

Dec. 8, 2011

Re: New Arvig Port Assignment

by Hannigan, Martin

Is Avrig live yet and ready for peers? Best, -M< On 11/21/11 11:28 AM, "Jay Hanke" <jayhanke(a)MANKATONETWORKS.NET> wrote: > Arvig > Port Main switch 7 (copper) > 69.147.218.7/24 > 2607:fe10:ffff::7/64 > We need your contact info and ASN. Also please update your peeringDB > information. > > Thanks and welcome aboard! ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 8, 2011

Fwd: IPv4 BGP Peering

by Jay Hanke

FYI ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dan Hendricks <dan_hendricks(a)mmi.net> Date: Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:19 AM Subject: IPv4 BGP Peering To: "peering(a)micemn.net" <peering(a)micemn.net> We will be shutting down the IPv4 BGP peering with you at MICE in the 511 building in Minneapolis, MN on Monday December 12th, 2011. This is being down to allow for some extensive maintenance and should be down for a couple of weeks. Our IP address for this peering connection is 69.147.218.42 and yours is 69.147.218.1 and 69.147.218.2. Thanks, Dan Hendricks Network Engineer Midcontinent Communications 410 S Phillips Ave Sioux Falls, SD 57104 (605) 357-5720 - Office dan_hendricks(a)mmi.net ________________________________ Note: This e-mail and any attachments may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and deleting it from your computer system. Thank you for your cooperation. -- Jay Hanke CTO, CCIE #19093 Mankato Networks LLC 619 S Front St Mankato, MN 56001-3838 Google 530-618-2398 jayhanke(a)mankatonetworks.net http://www.mankatonetworks.com ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Dec. 8, 2011

Re: Fwd: [AKAM-NOCC #B-C-8ZNKOA] Unreachable colocated server: 23.15.4.7

by Hannigan, Martin

Thank you! On 12/6/11 9:56 AM, "Mike Hemphill" <mhemphill(a)MNGATEWAY.COM> wrote: Rebooted Mike Hemphill FWR Communication Networks VP Sales 612-333-1922 voice 612-812-5242 cell 612-333-1945 fax mhemphill(a)mngateway.com Visit us at: www.mngateway.com <http://www.mngateway.com> ________________________________ From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Jay Hanke Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 8:06 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Fwd: [AKAM-NOCC #B-C-8ZNKOA] Unreachable colocated server: 23.15.4.7 Can someone take a look? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Panchaksharaiah, Vishwas" <vipancha(a)akamai.com> Date: Dec 5, 2011 8:45 PM Subject: [AKAM-NOCC #B-C-8ZNKOA] Unreachable colocated server: 23.15.4.7 To: <jayhanke(a)mankatonetworks.net> Cc: <nocc-shift(a)akamai.com> Hello, I'm writing to you from the Akamai Technologies Network Operations Command Center in Cambridge, MA, USA. We're having trouble with one of our machines in your Minneapolis, MN datacenter. This request is urgent. Please immediately send someone to the datacenter and have them reboot this machine. You can "reply-all" to this e-mail so that our ticket will get updated, or you can call us at any time to let us know what you find. Machine information: IP Address: 23.15.4.7 Serial number: 203821300394 Rack location: 904b Akamai ticket number: B-C-8ZNKOA Thank you for your help, Vishwas Panchaksharaiah -- Akamai Technologies NOCC e-mail: nocc-shift(a)akamai.com http://www.akamai.com Phone: 1-877-6-AKAMAI (1-877-625-2624 <tel:%281-877-625-2624> ) | International +1-617-444-3007 <tel:%2B1-617-444-3007> ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 ______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned by MCI Managed Email Content Service, using Skeptic(tm) technology powered by MessageLabs. For more information on MCI's Managed Email Content Service, visit http://www.mci.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

Dec. 6, 2011