- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Re: MICE Remote Switch Policy

by Jeremy Lumby

I wanted to see where this ended up. The public discussion has been open for a very long time. I would assume anyone who was going to chime in by now would have. What has the board decided on? From: Jeremy Lumby [mailto:jlumby@mnvoip.com] Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 1:22 PM To: MICE Discuss Subject: RE: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Remote Switch Policy Precisely why I am a fan of something in the middle. The minimum requirements will weed out the silly proposals and save time/effort. The public discussion will bring up issues that should be considered, and then the board can take the discussion, and use it to make a decision. With this being said I would say if the minimums were met, and there was no discussion, it should just be rubber stamped by the board. There are plenty of people who know a lot about BGP/networking on this list so there are plenty of opportunities to bring potential issues to light. I have thought a lot about running an extension switch in Minneapolis for an IX outside of North America. When you run the cost/benefit it just does not make any sense. I think those things would come to light in the public discussion phase. My personal opinion is anything outside of North America just does not make sense for the “Midwest”. The only reason that Cogent’s product does not fall on its face is because it does not need to stand on its own. If Cogent was not already in those locations with their other services, it would never have made it out of the gate. Marketing is probably the only thing keeping it alive. Jeremy From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Reid Fishler Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2022 11:53 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Remote Switch Policy The answer is somewhere in the middle. We do whats best for the exchange, and for the internet in general. There are MANY things where this is what was done by the community. Honest question...if someone wants to put an extension in Rio, Brazil, do we let them? How about in South Africa? Is there a line? An exchange has a purpose, and thats to get everyone local to each other, on one fabric...otherwise we are just making Cogents IX thing they sell, or any one of the number of global fabrics. At SOME point we need to say enough is enough. I am NOT saying we are there yet, but to allow EVERYTHING is a bit too much in the other direction. Reid Reid On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:44 AM Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com> wrote: I completely agree that the number of people who know very little about BGP is growing quickly, the real question is how do you deal with this problem. Do you not permit things across the board because of this, meaning that the opportunity is lost for the people that understand what they are doing? Or do you put as many reasonable precautions in place so that when someone screws up, it mostly just impacts them, and all of the other members maintain granular control? From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Reid Fishler Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2022 9:12 PM To:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Remote Switch Policy The issue is there are going to be more and more networks that are buying these peering services that don't always know what they are... Either by services, or because 'someone told me to'... Its not always those in the know that buy these things... Sometimes it's networks that DON'T know. Reid On Thu, Mar 24, 2022, 10:04 PM Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com> wrote: I understand the point a little better now. I would say it depends on the specific type of CDN. The more traditional ones like Cloudflare and Akamai it would not be a huge disincentive because they market themselves based on how close/low latency they are to the end user. Other CDNs that are delivering more of their own content like Netflix/Google would be more grateful for the free transport, and care less about the added latency (assuming no loss). -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2022 8:46 PM To:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Remote Switch Policy On 3/24/22 18:00, Jeremy Lumby wrote: > As for a disincentive for CDN's to connect, I have only seen the opposite. Most CDN's will only accept a connection to the core. The only time I have seen them connect to a remote was for a secondary connection to gain switch diversity. I wasn't talking about CDNs connecting to remotes. The concern, or at least how I understood it, was: Imagine we put a MICE extension in city X. In the immediate term, that's great, as now networks in city X can get content from Minneapolis CDNs. But in the longer-term, it may create a disincentive for CDNs to go to city X. Counter-point: Whether CDNs come to city X is not our problem. -- 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 -- Reid Fishler Senior Director Hurricane Electric +1-510-580-4178 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

May 6, 2022

Re: MICE Node for AS112

by David Farmer

I see the IPv4 routes now. Thanks On Thu, May 5, 2022 at 8:28 AM Isaiah Olson <iolson(a)paulbunyan.net> wrote: > Thanks for pointing this out. When this was originally set up, it looks > like I had set a limit of 100,000 routes for the IPv4 BGP sessions to the > MICE route servers, which we have now exceeded. I adjusted the limits and > reconfigured, and it looks like the routes for both protocols are present > on the looking glass again. > > Isaiah Olson > Network and Systems Administrator > Paul Bunyan Communications > 1831 Anne St NW > Bemidji, MN 56601 > (218) 444-4638 > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of David > Farmer > Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2022 11:14 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Node for AS112 > > I'm seeing IPv6 routes from the MICE Node for AS112, but not IPv4 routes > > > This is what the MICE Looking Glass sees; > > micemn-lg>sh bgp regexp _112_ > BGP table version is 103138859, local router ID is 206.108.255.250 > Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - > internal, > r RIB-failure, S Stale, m multipath, b backup-path, f > RT-Filter, > x best-external, a additional-path, c RIB-compressed, > Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete > RPKI validation codes: V valid, I invalid, N Not found > > Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path > * 192.31.196.0 206.108.255.52 255 0 6939 112 i > *> 206.108.255.52 255 0 6939 112 i > * 192.175.48.0 206.108.255.52 255 0 6939 112 i > *> 206.108.255.52 255 0 6939 112 i > micemn-lg>sh bgp ipv6 uni regexp _112_ > BGP table version is 165890313, local router ID is 206.108.255.250 > Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - > internal, > r RIB-failure, S Stale, m multipath, b backup-path, f > RT-Filter, > x best-external, a additional-path, c RIB-compressed, > Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete > RPKI validation codes: V valid, I invalid, N Not found > > Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path > *> 2001:4:112::/48 2001:504:27::70:0:1 > 0 112 i > * 2001:504:27::70:0:1 > 0 112 i > *> 2620:4F:8000::/48 > 2001:504:27::70:0:1 > 0 112 i > * 2001:504:27::70:0:1 > 0 112 i > micemn-lg> > -- > =============================================== > David Farmer 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 > -- =============================================== 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 ===============================================

May 5, 2022

Re: MICE Node for AS112

by Isaiah Olson

Thanks for pointing this out. When this was originally set up, it looks like I had set a limit of 100,000 routes for the IPv4 BGP sessions to the MICE route servers, which we have now exceeded. I adjusted the limits and reconfigured, and it looks like the routes for both protocols are present on the looking glass again. Isaiah Olson Network and Systems Administrator Paul Bunyan Communications 1831 Anne St NW Bemidji, MN 56601 (218) 444-4638 -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of David Farmer Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2022 11:14 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Node for AS112 I'm seeing IPv6 routes from the MICE Node for AS112, but not IPv4 routes This is what the MICE Looking Glass sees; micemn-lg>sh bgp regexp _112_ BGP table version is 103138859, local router ID is 206.108.255.250 Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal, r RIB-failure, S Stale, m multipath, b backup-path, f RT-Filter, x best-external, a additional-path, c RIB-compressed, Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete RPKI validation codes: V valid, I invalid, N Not found Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path * 192.31.196.0 206.108.255.52 255 0 6939 112 i *> 206.108.255.52 255 0 6939 112 i * 192.175.48.0 206.108.255.52 255 0 6939 112 i *> 206.108.255.52 255 0 6939 112 i micemn-lg>sh bgp ipv6 uni regexp _112_ BGP table version is 165890313, local router ID is 206.108.255.250 Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal, r RIB-failure, S Stale, m multipath, b backup-path, f RT-Filter, x best-external, a additional-path, c RIB-compressed, Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete RPKI validation codes: V valid, I invalid, N Not found Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path *> 2001:4:112::/48 2001:504:27::70:0:1 0 112 i * 2001:504:27::70:0:1 0 112 i *> 2620:4F:8000::/48 2001:504:27::70:0:1 0 112 i * 2001:504:27::70:0:1 0 112 i micemn-lg> -- =============================================== David Farmer 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

May 5, 2022

MICE Node for AS112

by David Farmer

I'm seeing IPv6 routes from the MICE Node for AS112, but not IPv4 routes This is what the MICE Looking Glass sees; micemn-lg>sh bgp regexp _112_ BGP table version is 103138859, local router ID is 206.108.255.250 Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal, r RIB-failure, S Stale, m multipath, b backup-path, f RT-Filter, x best-external, a additional-path, c RIB-compressed, Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete RPKI validation codes: V valid, I invalid, N Not found Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path * 192.31.196.0 206.108.255.52 255 0 6939 112 i *> 206.108.255.52 255 0 6939 112 i * 192.175.48.0 206.108.255.52 255 0 6939 112 i *> 206.108.255.52 255 0 6939 112 i micemn-lg>sh bgp ipv6 uni regexp _112_ BGP table version is 165890313, local router ID is 206.108.255.250 Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal, r RIB-failure, S Stale, m multipath, b backup-path, f RT-Filter, x best-external, a additional-path, c RIB-compressed, Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete RPKI validation codes: V valid, I invalid, N Not found Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path *> 2001:4:112::/48 2001:504:27::70:0:1 0 112 i * 2001:504:27::70:0:1 0 112 i *> 2620:4F:8000::/48 2001:504:27::70:0:1 0 112 i * 2001:504:27::70:0:1 0 112 i micemn-lg> -- =============================================== 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 ===============================================

May 5, 2022

Please welcome LTD Broadband. to MICE!

by Jeremy Lumby

Name: LTD Broadband Switch: South Front Networks Albert Lea Port: E9/1 ASN: 394330 IPv4: This is a port upgrade/move, all IP info remains the same. The new connection will be 100G IPv6: Peering Contact: coreyhauer(a)ltdbroadband.com Route Servers: No BFD: No Welcome Aboard Again! Jeremy Lumby Minnesota VoIP 9217 17th Ave S #216 Bloomington, MN 55425 Main: 612-355-7740 Direct: 612-392-6814 Fax: 952-873-7425 jlumby(a)mnvoip.com

May 3, 2022

Re: Please welcome Hennepin County to MICE!

by Doug McIntyre

On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 04:01:00PM -0500, Jeremy Lumby wrote: >Name: Hennepin County >Switch: MICE Core >Port: E 5/3 >ASN: 40382 >IPv4: 206.108.255.193/24 >IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:9DBE::1/64 >Peering Contact: peering(a)hennepin.us >Route Servers: YES >BFD: YES Added into the RR's. Welcome!

April 21, 2022

Please welcome Hennepin County to MICE!

by Jeremy Lumby

Name: Hennepin County Switch: MICE Core Port: E 5/3 ASN: 40382 IPv4: 206.108.255.193/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:9DBE::1/64 Peering Contact: peering(a)hennepin.us Route Servers: YES BFD: YES Welcome Aboard! Jeremy Lumby Minnesota VoIP 9217 17th Ave S #216 Bloomington, MN 55425 Main: 612-355-7740 Direct: 612-392-6814 Fax: 952-873-7425 jlumby(a)mnvoip.com

April 20, 2022

Re: IPv4 BGP session to Google down

by Frank Bulk

Thanks, stable for me for 1d 14h. Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jeremy Lumby Sent: Monday, April 18, 2022 8:27 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down I saw traffic come back yesterday, and got an official notice that they had solved the problem. -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Doug McIntyre Sent: Friday, April 15, 2022 5:39 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down Google has many tickets open about the issue. Apparently they are having issues with their transport network, and they aren't getting anywhere. No idea why they and the transport can't figure out a fix after all this time. On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 10:32:03PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Has a ticket been opened with Google? > >Frank > >From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay >Hanke >Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 4:52 PM >To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > >It's been oos for almost 2 weeks. > > >On Thu, Apr 7, 2022, 4:28 PM Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com<mailto:fbulk@mypremieronline.com>> wrote: >Ok, then maybe we're the only one down. > >Frank > >-----Original Message----- >From: MICE Discuss ><MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>> >On Behalf Of Jeff Wilde >Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 12:02 PM >To: >MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> >Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > >I did not. > > >Jeff Wilde * Network Engineer * Park Region Office 218.826.6161 * >Direct 218.826.8330 * Fax 218.826.6298 > > >-----Original Message----- >From: MICE Discuss ><MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>> >On Behalf Of Frank Bulk >Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 11:57 AM >To: >MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> >Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > >Our BGP session bounce several times last might between 10:00 and 10:07 pm Central, and then has been down from 10:21 am. > >Anyone else seeing this? I see a little drop in the graph (http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti/graph_view.php?action=tree&tree_id=1&lea…) this morning. > >Frank Bulk >FiberNet (AS18883) > >Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-3-NOTIFICATION: sent to neighbor >206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) 4/0 (Hold Timer Expired Error/Unspecified) 0 >bytes Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer >206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new >state Idle Apr 7 10:22:00 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer >206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state OpenConfirm event RecvKeepAlive >new state Established Apr 7 10:22:30 207.32.15.14 Rib: >%BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established >event HoldTime new state Idle > >________________________________ > >To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: >http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

April 19, 2022

Re: Please welcome Nsight Telservices to MICE!

by Doug McIntyre

On Sat, Apr 16, 2022 at 05:55:00PM -0500, Jeremy Lumby wrote: >Name: Nsight Telservices >Switch: MICE Core >Port: E 6/22/1 >ASN: 3663 >IPv4: 206.108.255.192/24 >IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:E4F::1/64 >Peering Contact: network-routing(a)nsight.com >Route Servers: YES >BFD: YES Added into the RR's. Welcome!

April 18, 2022

Re: IPv4 BGP session to Google down

by Jeremy Lumby

I saw traffic come back yesterday, and got an official notice that they had solved the problem. -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Doug McIntyre Sent: Friday, April 15, 2022 5:39 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down Google has many tickets open about the issue. Apparently they are having issues with their transport network, and they aren't getting anywhere. No idea why they and the transport can't figure out a fix after all this time. On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 10:32:03PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Has a ticket been opened with Google? > >Frank > >From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay >Hanke >Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 4:52 PM >To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > >It's been oos for almost 2 weeks. > > >On Thu, Apr 7, 2022, 4:28 PM Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com<mailto:fbulk@mypremieronline.com>> wrote: >Ok, then maybe we're the only one down. > >Frank > >-----Original Message----- >From: MICE Discuss ><MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>> >On Behalf Of Jeff Wilde >Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 12:02 PM >To: >MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> >Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > >I did not. > > >Jeff Wilde * Network Engineer * Park Region Office 218.826.6161 * >Direct 218.826.8330 * Fax 218.826.6298 > > >-----Original Message----- >From: MICE Discuss ><MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>> >On Behalf Of Frank Bulk >Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 11:57 AM >To: >MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> >Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > >Our BGP session bounce several times last might between 10:00 and 10:07 pm Central, and then has been down from 10:21 am. > >Anyone else seeing this? I see a little drop in the graph (http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti/graph_view.php?action=tree&tree_id=1&lea…) this morning. > >Frank Bulk >FiberNet (AS18883) > >Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-3-NOTIFICATION: sent to neighbor >206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) 4/0 (Hold Timer Expired Error/Unspecified) 0 >bytes Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer >206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new >state Idle Apr 7 10:22:00 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer >206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state OpenConfirm event RecvKeepAlive >new state Established Apr 7 10:22:30 207.32.15.14 Rib: >%BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established >event HoldTime new state Idle > >________________________________ > >To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: >http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

April 18, 2022

Re: IPv4 BGP session to Google down

by Jeff Wilde

Are you referring to this? BGP neighbor is 206.108.255.141 Remote AS 15169, local AS 25637, external link Description: --- Google --- Remote router ID 108.170.225.16 BGP state = Established, up for 4w5d Jeff Wilde * Network Engineer * Park Region Office 218.826.6161 * Direct 218.826.8330 * Fax 218.826.6298 -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Doug McIntyre Sent: Friday, April 15, 2022 5:39 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down Google has many tickets open about the issue. Apparently they are having issues with their transport network, and they aren't getting anywhere. No idea why they and the transport can't figure out a fix after all this time. On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 10:32:03PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Has a ticket been opened with Google? > >Frank > >From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay >Hanke >Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 4:52 PM >To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > >It's been oos for almost 2 weeks. > > >On Thu, Apr 7, 2022, 4:28 PM Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com<mailto:fbulk@mypremieronline.com>> wrote: >Ok, then maybe we're the only one down. > >Frank > >-----Original Message----- >From: MICE Discuss ><MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>> >On Behalf Of Jeff Wilde >Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 12:02 PM >To: >MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> >Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > >I did not. > > >Jeff Wilde * Network Engineer * Park Region Office 218.826.6161 * >Direct 218.826.8330 * Fax 218.826.6298 > > >-----Original Message----- >From: MICE Discuss ><MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>> >On Behalf Of Frank Bulk >Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 11:57 AM >To: >MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> >Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > >Our BGP session bounce several times last might between 10:00 and 10:07 pm Central, and then has been down from 10:21 am. > >Anyone else seeing this? I see a little drop in the graph (http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti/graph_view.php?action=tree&tree_id=1&lea…) this morning. > >Frank Bulk >FiberNet (AS18883) > >Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-3-NOTIFICATION: sent to neighbor >206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) 4/0 (Hold Timer Expired Error/Unspecified) 0 >bytes Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer >206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new >state Idle Apr 7 10:22:00 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer >206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state OpenConfirm event RecvKeepAlive >new state Established Apr 7 10:22:30 207.32.15.14 Rib: >%BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established >event HoldTime new state Idle > >________________________________ > >To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: >http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

April 18, 2022

Please welcome Nsight Telservices to MICE!

by Jeremy Lumby

Name: Nsight Telservices Switch: MICE Core Port: E 6/22/1 ASN: 3663 IPv4: 206.108.255.192/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:E4F::1/64 Peering Contact: network-routing(a)nsight.com Route Servers: YES BFD: YES Welcome Aboard! Jeremy Lumby Minnesota VoIP 9217 17th Ave S #216 Bloomington, MN 55425 Main: 612-355-7740 Direct: 612-392-6814 Fax: 952-873-7425 jlumby(a)mnvoip.com

April 16, 2022

Re: IPv4 BGP session to Google down

by Doug McIntyre

Google has many tickets open about the issue. Apparently they are having issues with their transport network, and they aren't getting anywhere. No idea why they and the transport can't figure out a fix after all this time. On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 10:32:03PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >Has a ticket been opened with Google? > >Frank > >From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay Hanke >Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 4:52 PM >To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > >It's been oos for almost 2 weeks. > > >On Thu, Apr 7, 2022, 4:28 PM Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com<mailto:fbulk@mypremieronline.com>> wrote: >Ok, then maybe we're the only one down. > >Frank > >-----Original Message----- >From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>> On Behalf Of Jeff Wilde >Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 12:02 PM >To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> >Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > >I did not. > > >Jeff Wilde * Network Engineer * Park Region >Office 218.826.6161 * Direct 218.826.8330 * Fax 218.826.6298 > > >-----Original Message----- >From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>> On Behalf Of Frank Bulk >Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 11:57 AM >To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> >Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > >Our BGP session bounce several times last might between 10:00 and 10:07 pm Central, and then has been down from 10:21 am. > >Anyone else seeing this? I see a little drop in the graph (http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti/graph_view.php?action=tree&tree_id=1&lea…) this morning. > >Frank Bulk >FiberNet (AS18883) > >Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-3-NOTIFICATION: sent to neighbor 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) 4/0 (Hold Timer Expired Error/Unspecified) 0 bytes Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new state Idle Apr 7 10:22:00 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state OpenConfirm event RecvKeepAlive new state Established Apr 7 10:22:30 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new state Idle > >________________________________ > >To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: >http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

April 15, 2022

Re: IPv4 BGP session to Google down

by Frank Bulk

Has a ticket been opened with Google? Frank From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay Hanke Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 4:52 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down It's been oos for almost 2 weeks. On Thu, Apr 7, 2022, 4:28 PM Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com<mailto:fbulk@mypremieronline.com>> wrote: Ok, then maybe we're the only one down. Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>> On Behalf Of Jeff Wilde Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 12:02 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down I did not. Jeff Wilde * Network Engineer * Park Region Office 218.826.6161 * Direct 218.826.8330 * Fax 218.826.6298 -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>> On Behalf Of Frank Bulk Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 11:57 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down Our BGP session bounce several times last might between 10:00 and 10:07 pm Central, and then has been down from 10:21 am. Anyone else seeing this? I see a little drop in the graph (http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti/graph_view.php?action=tree&tree_id=1&lea…) this morning. Frank Bulk FiberNet (AS18883) Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-3-NOTIFICATION: sent to neighbor 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) 4/0 (Hold Timer Expired Error/Unspecified) 0 bytes Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new state Idle Apr 7 10:22:00 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state OpenConfirm event RecvKeepAlive new state Established Apr 7 10:22:30 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new state Idle ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

April 15, 2022

Re: Please welcome G-Core Labs S.A. to MICE!

by Doug McIntyre

On Fri, Apr 08, 2022 at 05:18:00PM -0500, Jeremy Lumby wrote: >Name: G-Core Labs S.A. >Switch: MICE Core >Port: E 4/7 >ASN: 199524 >IPv4: 206.108.255.191/24 >IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:3:0B64::1/64 >Peering Contact: noc(a)gcore.lu >Route Servers: YES >BFD: No Added into the RR's. Welcome!

April 9, 2022

Please welcome G-Core Labs S.A. to MICE!

by Jeremy Lumby

Name: G-Core Labs S.A. Switch: MICE Core Port: E 4/7 ASN: 199524 IPv4: 206.108.255.191/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:3:0B64::1/64 Peering Contact: noc(a)gcore.lu Route Servers: YES BFD: No Welcome Aboard! Jeremy Lumby Minnesota VoIP 9217 17th Ave S #216 Bloomington, MN 55425 Main: 612-355-7740 Direct: 612-392-6814 Fax: 952-873-7425 jlumby(a)mnvoip.com

April 8, 2022

Re: IPv4 BGP session to Google down

by Jay Hanke

It's been oos for almost 2 weeks. On Thu, Apr 7, 2022, 4:28 PM Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com> wrote: > Ok, then maybe we're the only one down. > > Frank > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jeff > Wilde > Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 12:02 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > > I did not. > > > Jeff Wilde * Network Engineer * Park Region > Office 218.826.6161 * Direct 218.826.8330 * Fax 218.826.6298 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Frank > Bulk > Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 11:57 AM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down > > Our BGP session bounce several times last might between 10:00 and 10:07 pm > Central, and then has been down from 10:21 am. > > Anyone else seeing this? I see a little drop in the graph ( > http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti/graph_view.php?action=tree&tree_id=1&lea…) > this morning. > > Frank Bulk > FiberNet (AS18883) > > Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-3-NOTIFICATION: sent to neighbor > 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) 4/0 (Hold Timer Expired Error/Unspecified) 0 > bytes Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer > 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new state > Idle Apr 7 10:22:00 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer > 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state OpenConfirm event RecvKeepAlive new > state Established Apr 7 10:22:30 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer > 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new state > Idle >

April 7, 2022

Re: IPv4 BGP session to Google down

by Frank Bulk

Ok, then maybe we're the only one down. Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jeff Wilde Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 12:02 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down I did not. Jeff Wilde * Network Engineer * Park Region Office 218.826.6161 * Direct 218.826.8330 * Fax 218.826.6298 -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Frank Bulk Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 11:57 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down Our BGP session bounce several times last might between 10:00 and 10:07 pm Central, and then has been down from 10:21 am. Anyone else seeing this? I see a little drop in the graph (http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti/graph_view.php?action=tree&tree_id=1&lea…) this morning. Frank Bulk FiberNet (AS18883) Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-3-NOTIFICATION: sent to neighbor 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) 4/0 (Hold Timer Expired Error/Unspecified) 0 bytes Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new state Idle Apr 7 10:22:00 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state OpenConfirm event RecvKeepAlive new state Established Apr 7 10:22:30 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new state Idle

April 7, 2022

Re: IPv4 BGP session to Google down

by Jeff Wilde

I did not. Jeff Wilde * Network Engineer * Park Region Office 218.826.6161 * Direct 218.826.8330 * Fax 218.826.6298 -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Frank Bulk Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2022 11:57 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] IPv4 BGP session to Google down Our BGP session bounce several times last might between 10:00 and 10:07 pm Central, and then has been down from 10:21 am. Anyone else seeing this? I see a little drop in the graph (http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti/graph_view.php?action=tree&tree_id=1&lea…) this morning. Frank Bulk FiberNet (AS18883) Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-3-NOTIFICATION: sent to neighbor 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) 4/0 (Hold Timer Expired Error/Unspecified) 0 bytes Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new state Idle Apr 7 10:22:00 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state OpenConfirm event RecvKeepAlive new state Established Apr 7 10:22:30 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new state Idle

April 7, 2022

IPv4 BGP session to Google down

by Frank Bulk

Our BGP session bounce several times last might between 10:00 and 10:07 pm Central, and then has been down from 10:21 am. Anyone else seeing this? I see a little drop in the graph (http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti/graph_view.php?action=tree&tree_id=1&lea…) this morning. Frank Bulk FiberNet (AS18883) Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-3-NOTIFICATION: sent to neighbor 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) 4/0 (Hold Timer Expired Error/Unspecified) 0 bytes Apr 7 10:21:55 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new state Idle Apr 7 10:22:00 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state OpenConfirm event RecvKeepAlive new state Established Apr 7 10:22:30 207.32.15.14 Rib: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: peer 206.108.255.167 (AS 15169) old state Established event HoldTime new state Idle

April 7, 2022

Re: MICE Remote Switch Policy

by Justin Krejci

Jonathan, Very excellent points. Here are some reply thoughts to consider. 1. the member has their own private, long distance, layer 2 link to an IX. The member themself knows it's a long distance but most of the other members of the IX probably will not have any idea, unless they happen to infer it from latency to your router or you otherwise disclose it. 2. if the IX does a long distance layer 2 link to an official/remote switch, it would be a lot more clear to people at a glance that members on such a far away remote switch are indeed far away As suggested in an earlier post of this thread, BGP communities could be added on the route server sessions of members marking the member's routes as originating via switch X. Then you as a fellow member could choose to adjust your BGP knobs based on that data, maybe you want to not take their routes or lower your local pref for them specifically and even choose to AS prepend your routes to them or not advertise to them at all. With members individually connecting a long distance, only the members themselves are respectively aware of the fact that they are far away. For those not using route servers, they can still easily gauge the member distances if they are clearly documented as connected to switches classed as far away switches and therefore can make their own routing decisions based on that knowledge, which may include not peering with distant members at all at said IX. If geographic distance is a concern for connected/connecting members, maybe the conversation should be had on whether remote switches or individual members can be connecting from such a distance greater than XYZ distance or perhaps XYZ avg latency, as you mentioned. But now, what if I setup a router in a nearby geographic location with low latency but only have a single router and a single connection back to my main established network that is far away? I as the member look to be close to the fabric and indeed am close to the fabric, yet most of my eyeballs and/or servers are still far away, in this hypothetical situation. Though I do think, as you imply, there is a point of diminishing returns by adding more and more connectivity at increasing distances, not just in target market / brand but also in the very real operational issues that can arise from two networks taking a highly inefficient path via an IX because it is shorter AS hops than usual transit links but is much longer geographically. I have seen this happen first hand. ________________________________ From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> on behalf of Jonathan Stewart <jonathan(a)LES.NET> Sent: Tuesday, April 5, 2022 4:22 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Remote Switch Policy A bit late to the discussion, but here are my thoughts: On Thu., 2022-03-24 3:58 p.m., Richard Laager wrote: > At Wiktel, I peer with MN VoIP's far away extensions in Minneapolis. > For example, I peer at SeattleIX (SIX) in Minneapolis. This has caused > me some issues. For example, latency-sensitive gaming traffic was > tromboning > Wiktel-Minneapolis-Seattle-Chicago-Seattle-Minneapolis-Wiktel rather > than Wiktel-Chicago-Wiktel. This is the biggest issue I am concerned about. Layer-2 can't tell us how far away the peer is. BGP doesn't have knobs for varying latency across peers on the same Layer-2. The SIX example of really-remote peers, with resultant latency higher than Transit, is a performance degradation for SIX and their members, and reduces the quality of SIX, I'd argue. I would suggest that MICE have a limit, say 5 ms RTT, on latency to remote switches. Then we can say that MICE is in a geographic region, not potentially a pan-North-America layer-2. Part of MICE's identity should be its location, and the resultant low-latency across MICE itself. If MICE is in Kansas City, and KCIX is in Minneapolis, what's the difference between them? Why do they both exist if they serve the same datacentres in the same way: a Layer-2 ethernet fabric? I become confused at what problem is being solved when IXes start overlapping and becoming non-geographic, rather than limited to a metro area, or certain radius around a hub. I think there's a difference between an individual member (me) arriving over a long layer-2 link (from Winnipeg) to the IX, and the IX doing long layer-2 links themselves. The difference is that I have knowledge of and control over my long-haul links, but if the IX does it, unexpectedly long-haul paths happen without my decision to use them. Finally, I'm a big fan of what MICE has accomplished so far, I hope this message doesn't read as being overly critical. Cheers, Jonathan AS18451 - LES.NET Jonathan Stewart Network Engineer LES.NET - AS18451 Desk: 1-204-666-6191 Mobile: 1-204-990-2120 130 Portage Avenue E Winnipeg, MB R3C 0A1 CANADA

April 5, 2022

Re: MICE Remote Switch Policy

by Jonathan Stewart

A bit late to the discussion, but here are my thoughts: On Thu., 2022-03-24 3:58 p.m., Richard Laager wrote: > At Wiktel, I peer with MN VoIP's far away extensions in Minneapolis. > For example, I peer at SeattleIX (SIX) in Minneapolis. This has caused > me some issues. For example, latency-sensitive gaming traffic was > tromboning > Wiktel-Minneapolis-Seattle-Chicago-Seattle-Minneapolis-Wiktel rather > than Wiktel-Chicago-Wiktel. This is the biggest issue I am concerned about. Layer-2 can't tell us how far away the peer is. BGP doesn't have knobs for varying latency across peers on the same Layer-2. The SIX example of really-remote peers, with resultant latency higher than Transit, is a performance degradation for SIX and their members, and reduces the quality of SIX, I'd argue. I would suggest that MICE have a limit, say 5 ms RTT, on latency to remote switches. Then we can say that MICE is in a geographic region, not potentially a pan-North-America layer-2. Part of MICE's identity should be its location, and the resultant low-latency across MICE itself. If MICE is in Kansas City, and KCIX is in Minneapolis, what's the difference between them? Why do they both exist if they serve the same datacentres in the same way: a Layer-2 ethernet fabric? I become confused at what problem is being solved when IXes start overlapping and becoming non-geographic, rather than limited to a metro area, or certain radius around a hub. I think there's a difference between an individual member (me) arriving over a long layer-2 link (from Winnipeg) to the IX, and the IX doing long layer-2 links themselves. The difference is that I have knowledge of and control over my long-haul links, but if the IX does it, unexpectedly long-haul paths happen without my decision to use them. Finally, I'm a big fan of what MICE has accomplished so far, I hope this message doesn't read as being overly critical. Cheers, Jonathan AS18451 - LES.NET Jonathan Stewart Network Engineer LES.NET - AS18451 Desk: 1-204-666-6191 Mobile: 1-204-990-2120 130 Portage Avenue E Winnipeg, MB R3C 0A1 CANADA

April 5, 2022

OT: NANOG call for presentations

by steve ulrich

folks - long time lurker here. ( as well as a couple of times meatspace meeting attendee. ) apologies in advance for the off-topic email, but i'm on the NANOG program committee and we've had folks express interest in presentations regarding regional peering exchanges as well as talks regarding independent networks that have done interesting things from an operational perspective. e.g.: managing growth, novel deployment of access technologies. etc. it struck me that the folks peering at MICE or engaged in MICE operations might have great presentation ideas/material.. the next NANOG is in june in montreal, ca. but we're always looking for presentations for future NANOGs as well. NANOG has a variety of different presentation formats and we're open to suggestions. please feel free to submit an abstract online ( https://nanog.org/program/call-presentations/) and someone from the program committee thanks! -- steve ulrich (sulrich(a)botwerks.org)

April 5, 2022

Please welcome Long Lines Broadband to MICE!

by Jeremy Lumby

Name: Long Lines Broadband Switch: MICE Main Port: E6/21/1 ASN: 32867 IPv4: This is a port upgrade, all IP info remains the same. The new connection will be 100G IPv6: Peering Contact: data(a)longlines.biz Route Servers: Yes BFD: No Welcome Aboard Again! Jeremy Lumby Minnesota VoIP 9217 17th Ave S #216 Bloomington, MN 55425 Main: 612-355-7740 Direct: 612-392-6814 Fax: 952-873-7425 jlumby(a)mnvoip.com

April 4, 2022

ARIN NOAUTH

by Jay Hanke

ARIN NOAUTH (legacy IRR) is getting shut down today at 11 AM central time. There will likely be some filtering issues across the internet for networks that haven't updated their IRR. https://www.arin.net/blog/2022/02/16/Take-Action-Now-to-Prepare-for-the-ARI… -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

April 4, 2022