- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Re: Zayo MICE Remote

by James Urwiller

just got word from zayo that if not completed tomorrow, that significant progress will be made to complete the upgrade. here’s to hoping!!! Sent from my iPhone 7 > On Feb 24, 2019, at 13:46, Jay Hanke <jayhanke(a)southfront.io> wrote: > > Of the affected remote participants, has everyone opened a Zayo ticket? > >> On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 12:50 PM James Urwiller <james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> wrote: >> nothing. :(. >> >> Sent from my iPhone 7 >> >> > On Feb 24, 2019, at 12:39, Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com> wrote: >> > >> > Any update from Zayo or anyone else? The graph last night recorded 20.07 Gbps. >> > >> > Frank >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of James Urwiller >> > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 3:36 PM >> > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >> > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote >> > >> > Well my ticket is now in the hands of design/architecture @ Zayo. Will see >> > if I get any response from them. >> > >> > James Urwiller >> > Network Architect >> > Stealth Broadband >> > james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: James Urwiller <james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> >> > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 11:59 >> > To: 'MICE Discuss' <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> >> > Subject: RE: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote >> > >> > I called and opened a ticket regarding this.. I'll see what kind of mischief >> > I can cause >> > >> > James Urwiller >> > Network Architect >> > Stealth Broadband >> > james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jeremy >> > Lumby >> > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 19:14 >> > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >> > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote >> > >> > Just an FYI: >> > >> > In the event that one of the members in Belle Plaine needs a quick >> > alternate route, I do have transport capacity between Belle Plaine, and my >> > MICE extension switch. I could potentially get you moved as fast as 1-2 >> > business days. >> > >> > >> > Jeremy Lumby >> > Minnesota VoIP >> > 9217 17th Ave S >> > Suite 216 >> > Bloomington, MN 55425 >> > Main: 612-355-7740 x211 >> > Direct: 612-392-6814 >> > EFax: 952-873-7425 >> > jlumby(a)mnvoip.com >> > >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of >> > Richard Laager >> > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 7:04 PM >> > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >> > Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote >> > >> > The 20G backhaul from the Zayo MICE remote in Belle Plaine to the MICE Core >> > Switch has recently exceeded 17G, 18G, and even 19G on the Cacti graphs. >> > >> > I initially reported this to Zayo on January 14th. We preemptively allocated >> > another 10G port on January 17th in an attempt to streamline the upgrade. I >> > asked for a status update on January 24th. Today, I contacted Zayo again >> > stressing the seriousness and urgency of the situation. The upgrade does >> > seem to be moving forward again, but Zayo has not provided an estimate on >> > when the upgrade will be complete. >> > >> > Given that the backhaul hit 19.73G last night, I'm bringing this to the >> > attention of the participants, who may wish to take some action (e.g. >> > shifting traffic). >> > >> > -- >> > Richard >> > > > > -- > Jay Hanke, President > South Front Networks > jayhanke(a)southfront.io > Phone 612-204-0000 > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Feb. 26, 2019

Re: Zayo MICE Remote

by James Urwiller

Update on my Zayo ticket.. LATEST CASE COMMENT *Comments* Hello, Our circuit design team is still working on this and it has already been expedited. Further updates will be shared once they are available. Thanks, Katelin James Urwiller Network Architect Stealth Broadband james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com [image: stealth300] *From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *Jay Hanke *Sent:* Sunday, February 24, 2019 13:47 *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET *Subject:* Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote Of the affected remote participants, has everyone opened a Zayo ticket? On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 12:50 PM James Urwiller < james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> wrote: nothing. :(. Sent from my iPhone 7 > On Feb 24, 2019, at 12:39, Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com> wrote: > > Any update from Zayo or anyone else? The graph last night recorded 20.07 Gbps. > > Frank > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of James Urwiller > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 3:36 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > Well my ticket is now in the hands of design/architecture @ Zayo. Will see > if I get any response from them. > > James Urwiller > Network Architect > Stealth Broadband > james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Urwiller <james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 11:59 > To: 'MICE Discuss' <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> > Subject: RE: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > I called and opened a ticket regarding this.. I'll see what kind of mischief > I can cause > > James Urwiller > Network Architect > Stealth Broadband > james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jeremy > Lumby > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 19:14 > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > Just an FYI: > > In the event that one of the members in Belle Plaine needs a quick > alternate route, I do have transport capacity between Belle Plaine, and my > MICE extension switch. I could potentially get you moved as fast as 1-2 > business days. > > > Jeremy Lumby > Minnesota VoIP > 9217 17th Ave S > Suite 216 > Bloomington, MN 55425 > Main: 612-355-7740 x211 > Direct: 612-392-6814 > EFax: 952-873-7425 > jlumby(a)mnvoip.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of > Richard Laager > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 7:04 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > The 20G backhaul from the Zayo MICE remote in Belle Plaine to the MICE Core > Switch has recently exceeded 17G, 18G, and even 19G on the Cacti graphs. > > I initially reported this to Zayo on January 14th. We preemptively allocated > another 10G port on January 17th in an attempt to streamline the upgrade. I > asked for a status update on January 24th. Today, I contacted Zayo again > stressing the seriousness and urgency of the situation. The upgrade does > seem to be moving forward again, but Zayo has not provided an estimate on > when the upgrade will be complete. > > Given that the backhaul hit 19.73G last night, I'm bringing this to the > attention of the participants, who may wish to take some action (e.g. > shifting traffic). > > -- > Richard > -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000 ------------------------------ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Mike Horwath

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 03:49:55PM +0000, Chris Wopat wrote: > If the goal is something small, one would likely have to go with a real > x86 based thing, perhaps an intel NUC: > > https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/boards-kits/nuc.html Or any Xeon-D system would work - has more ethernets, 10Gbps available as well, very low power. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by steve ulrich

aiui, anchor's are not meant to be used for b/w testing per se and are to be used in conjunction with the atlas probes. the only anchor that i'm aware of that might be MICE attached is at wikstrom. there are however a number of atlas probes in the area. (i host a couple) On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:45 AM Jay Hanke <jayhanke(a)southfront.io> wrote: > I think there is an OpenWRT project floating around for network testing. > That hardware can be had for less than $100. > > There is also the RIPE Atlas project that is worth checking out. It looks > like some MICE members have existing anchors. > > *https://atlas.ripe.net/ <https://atlas.ripe.net/>* > > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:33 AM Jeff Wilde <jeff.wilde(a)parkregion.com> > wrote: > >> Wouldn't that be like a $200+ client solution? Seems relatively high is >> the issue or am I looking at it wrong. I know that Vantage Point is pretty >> costly when your talking about 100+ or whatever the number is clients. >> >> >> Jeff >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Lubitz, >> Jake (MNIT) >> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 10:05 AM >> To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server >> >> +1 on the NUC. The Raspi 3B+ USB ports and Ethernet port all share an USB >> 2.0 bus. So at most, you may see up to 300Mbps of throughput on the Raspi. >> I've tried iperf and speedtest-cli on the Raspi and never got over 200Mbps >> on a 1Gbps WAN connection. >> >> Jake >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Chris >> Wopat >> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 9:50 AM >> To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET >> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server >> >> On 2/25/19 9:46 AM, Shaun Carlson wrote: >> > I was looking at a couple of options for Raspberry Pi, but haven't >> > built anything yet. Have you? >> >> Pi starting with model 3b+ can link at gigabit, but cannot do anywhere >> near that speed. >> >> If the goal is something small, one would likely have to go with a real >> x86 based thing, perhaps an intel NUC: >> >> >> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.intel.… >> >> >> -- >> Chris Wopat >> Network Engineer, WiscNet >> wopat(a)wiscnet.net 608-210-3965 >> > > > -- > Jay Hanke, President > South Front Networks > jayhanke(a)southfront.io > Phone 612-204-0000 > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > -- steve ulrich (sulrich(a)botwerks.*)

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Corey Hines

I can attest, RPI 3B+ starts dropping around 250-350mbps of sustained throughput. Corey Hines Systems Engineer Arista Networks m 612-209-6550 o 408-547-8075 chines(a)arista.com TAC: support(a)arista.com www.arista.com Arista EOS: A Tale of Opposite Architectures <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hfwr6sY27hA&authuser=1> Download the EOS Configuration Manual <https://www.arista.com/assets/data/docs/Manuals/EOS-4.15.4F-Manual.pdf> Install vEOS-lab for testing & training <https://eos.arista.com/running-veos-on-esxi-5-5/> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:49 AM Chris Wopat <wopat(a)wiscnet.net> wrote: > On 2/25/19 9:46 AM, Shaun Carlson wrote: > > I was looking at a couple of options for Raspberry Pi, but haven't built > > anything yet. Have you? > > Pi starting with model 3b+ can link at gigabit, but cannot do anywhere > near that speed. > > If the goal is something small, one would likely have to go with a real > x86 based thing, perhaps an intel NUC: > > https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/boards-kits/nuc.html > > > -- > Chris Wopat > Network Engineer, WiscNet > wopat(a)wiscnet.net 608-210-3965 >

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Jay Hanke

I think there is an OpenWRT project floating around for network testing. That hardware can be had for less than $100. There is also the RIPE Atlas project that is worth checking out. It looks like some MICE members have existing anchors. *https://atlas.ripe.net/ <https://atlas.ripe.net/>* On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:33 AM Jeff Wilde <jeff.wilde(a)parkregion.com> wrote: > Wouldn't that be like a $200+ client solution? Seems relatively high is > the issue or am I looking at it wrong. I know that Vantage Point is pretty > costly when your talking about 100+ or whatever the number is clients. > > > Jeff > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Lubitz, > Jake (MNIT) > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 10:05 AM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server > > +1 on the NUC. The Raspi 3B+ USB ports and Ethernet port all share an USB > 2.0 bus. So at most, you may see up to 300Mbps of throughput on the Raspi. > I've tried iperf and speedtest-cli on the Raspi and never got over 200Mbps > on a 1Gbps WAN connection. > > Jake > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Chris > Wopat > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 9:50 AM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server > > On 2/25/19 9:46 AM, Shaun Carlson wrote: > > I was looking at a couple of options for Raspberry Pi, but haven't > > built anything yet. Have you? > > Pi starting with model 3b+ can link at gigabit, but cannot do anywhere > near that speed. > > If the goal is something small, one would likely have to go with a real > x86 based thing, perhaps an intel NUC: > > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.intel.… > > > -- > Chris Wopat > Network Engineer, WiscNet > wopat(a)wiscnet.net 608-210-3965 > -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Jeff Wilde

Wouldn't that be like a $200+ client solution? Seems relatively high is the issue or am I looking at it wrong. I know that Vantage Point is pretty costly when your talking about 100+ or whatever the number is clients. Jeff -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Lubitz, Jake (MNIT) Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 10:05 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server +1 on the NUC. The Raspi 3B+ USB ports and Ethernet port all share an USB 2.0 bus. So at most, you may see up to 300Mbps of throughput on the Raspi. I've tried iperf and speedtest-cli on the Raspi and never got over 200Mbps on a 1Gbps WAN connection. Jake -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Chris Wopat Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 9:50 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server On 2/25/19 9:46 AM, Shaun Carlson wrote: > I was looking at a couple of options for Raspberry Pi, but haven't > built anything yet. Have you? Pi starting with model 3b+ can link at gigabit, but cannot do anywhere near that speed. If the goal is something small, one would likely have to go with a real x86 based thing, perhaps an intel NUC: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.intel.… -- Chris Wopat Network Engineer, WiscNet wopat(a)wiscnet.net 608-210-3965

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Lubitz, Jake (MNIT)

+1 on the NUC. The Raspi 3B+ USB ports and Ethernet port all share an USB 2.0 bus. So at most, you may see up to 300Mbps of throughput on the Raspi. I've tried iperf and speedtest-cli on the Raspi and never got over 200Mbps on a 1Gbps WAN connection. Jake -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Chris Wopat Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 9:50 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server On 2/25/19 9:46 AM, Shaun Carlson wrote: > I was looking at a couple of options for Raspberry Pi, but haven't > built anything yet. Have you? Pi starting with model 3b+ can link at gigabit, but cannot do anywhere near that speed. If the goal is something small, one would likely have to go with a real x86 based thing, perhaps an intel NUC: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.intel.… -- Chris Wopat Network Engineer, WiscNet wopat(a)wiscnet.net 608-210-3965

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Reid Fishler

Wasn't there JUST a thread on this on Nanog? (what to use for speedtest gear) Reid On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:49 AM Chris Wopat <wopat(a)wiscnet.net> wrote: > On 2/25/19 9:46 AM, Shaun Carlson wrote: > > I was looking at a couple of options for Raspberry Pi, but haven't built > > anything yet. Have you? > > Pi starting with model 3b+ can link at gigabit, but cannot do anywhere > near that speed. > > If the goal is something small, one would likely have to go with a real > x86 based thing, perhaps an intel NUC: > > https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/boards-kits/nuc.html > > > -- > Chris Wopat > Network Engineer, WiscNet > wopat(a)wiscnet.net 608-210-3965 > -- Reid Fishler Director Hurricane Electric +1-510-580-4178

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Chris Wopat

On 2/25/19 9:46 AM, Shaun Carlson wrote: > I was looking at a couple of options for Raspberry Pi, but haven't built > anything yet. Have you? Pi starting with model 3b+ can link at gigabit, but cannot do anywhere near that speed. If the goal is something small, one would likely have to go with a real x86 based thing, perhaps an intel NUC: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/boards-kits/nuc.html -- Chris Wopat Network Engineer, WiscNet wopat(a)wiscnet.net 608-210-3965

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Shaun Carlson

I was looking at a couple of options for Raspberry Pi, but haven't built anything yet. Have you? s *Shaun Carlson* Director of R&D and Continuous Innovation *ph*: (218) 346.8673 | *em*: shaun.carlson(a)arvig.com *schedule a meeting:* phone call <https://x.ai/calendar/shauncarlson/phone> | video call <https://x.ai/calendar/shauncarlson/video> | meeting <https://x.ai/calendar/shauncarlson/office> *Arvig* | 150 Second Street SW | Perham, MN 56573 | arvig.com On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:37 AM Jeff Wilde <jeff.wilde(a)parkregion.com> wrote: > Have you looked into using a raspberry PI device? > > > > > > *From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *Steve > Howard > *Sent:* Monday, February 25, 2019 9:20 AM > *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > *Subject:* Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server > > > > Our Calix sales guy has told us that they have changed their software to > support servers like ours. > > However, as I understand things, the Calix testing solution only works > with their Gigaspire product. This greatly limits the usefulness of their > product so we developed an in-house solution based on smokeping to do the > testing for us. Not ideal, but, it will get the job done. > > On 02/25/2019 08:11 AM, Frank Bulk wrote: > > I’m not sure how many companies are also interested in this, but if it > could be used by Calix or Vantage Point’s CAF II-based broadband testing > solutions, we would be interested in financially supporting this. > > > > Frank > > > > *From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> > <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *Jay Hanke > *Sent:* Sunday, February 24, 2019 11:13 AM > *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > *Subject:* [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server > > > > Was there any progress on this? > > > > -- > > Jay Hanke, President > > South Front Networks > > jayhanke(a)southfront.io > > Phone 612-204-0000 > > > ------------------------------ > > 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 >

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Jeff Wilde

Have you looked into using a raspberry PI device? From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Steve Howard Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 9:20 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server Our Calix sales guy has told us that they have changed their software to support servers like ours. However, as I understand things, the Calix testing solution only works with their Gigaspire product. This greatly limits the usefulness of their product so we developed an in-house solution based on smokeping to do the testing for us. Not ideal, but, it will get the job done. On 02/25/2019 08:11 AM, Frank Bulk wrote: I’m not sure how many companies are also interested in this, but if it could be used by Calix or Vantage Point’s CAF II-based broadband testing solutions, we would be interested in financially supporting this. Frank From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET><mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay Hanke Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2019 11:13 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server Was there any progress on this? -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io<mailto:jayhanke@southfront.io> Phone 612-204-0000 ________________________________ 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

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Steve Howard

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Steve Howard

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Steve Howard

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Jay Hanke

What would the connection need to look like? Would the route to/from the test server show up in the route servers, require bilateral or new layer2? Jay On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 8:41 AM Steve Howard <showard(a)paulbunyan.net> wrote: > > Yep. We are working with our Washington attorneys to get them to get some > confirmation that MICE is an acceptable location. The rules state the St > Paul "metropolitan area". My belief is that MICE is in the St Paul > metropolitan area, but, we'd like to get some written confirmation to be > safe. > > > > On 02/25/2019 06:59 AM, Dean Bahls wrote: > > Politicians aren’t Internet savvy. So it ends up in the wrong place. * > *sigh** > > > > Dean > > > > > > *From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> > <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *Jay Hanke > *Sent:* Sunday, February 24, 2019 5:34 PM > *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > *Subject:* Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server > > > > Interesting, I wonder how they came up with St Paul (no public IXP). Also > Omaha is missing last I looked, Omaha was larger than KCIX. > > > > If someone implements something in St. Paul. I have some networks looking > for test locations. It might bring more eyeballs to mice. > > > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 5:00 PM Richard Laager <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: > > On 2/24/19 4:43 PM, Jay Hanke wrote: > > Is there a public FCC doc someplace? > > I think this is the one, but I'm really not positive on that. FCC stuff > isn't my area of expertise. > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-18-710A1.pdf > > -- > Richard > > > > > -- > > Jay Hanke, President > > South Front Networks > > jayhanke(a)southfront.io > > Phone 612-204-0000 > > > ------------------------------ > > 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 > -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Steve Howard

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Jay Hanke

Steve- Are you open to allowing other cooperatives to use it (beyond CNS attached members)? On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 8:15 AM Steve Howard <showard(a)paulbunyan.net> wrote: > On 02/24/2019 04:36 PM, Richard Laager wrote: > > On 2/24/19 11:13 AM, Jay Hanke wrote: > > Was there any progress on this? > > I believe Steve decided to keep his iperf server private. > > > > We are in the process of replacing our compliance speed test server at > MICE. It is "semi-private". i.e. It is operating on a separate VLAN that > is on the CNS Remote switch. Anybody who is connected to the CNS remote > can request access and we'll set them up. This methodology was chosen due > to several items of concern that were brought up and the last MICE meeting. > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > 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, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Steve Howard

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE Google Traffic

by Jeremy Lumby

I agree it does not seem right, however I have talked to Google about it almost 10 times, and they find/fix other unrelated issues many of the times, however they still claim there is nothing limiting traffic below their 100G port speed. From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Frank Bulk Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 8:11 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Google Traffic It seems a bit odd that it floats so evenly at ~56 Gbps most of the day: http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti/graph.php?action=view&local_graph_id=124… Does that seem right? Frank From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Mike Wilker Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2019 9:32 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Google Traffic Thanks for the update Jeremy. Thank You, Mike Wilker CTO ( Office: (507) 214-0259 - Email: mwilker(a)jagcom.net www.JagCom.net 213 South Oak Avenue Owatonna, MN 55060 On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 7:31 AM Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com> wrote: I just got the official word back from Google that everything should be stable. From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of AnthonyAnderberg(a)nuvera.net Sent: Friday, February 01, 2019 11:44 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Google Traffic It looks like Google’s MICE traffic levels are significantly higher tonight - not as high as they’d been, but I suspect a lot of us are still suppressing our prefixes to them at MICE. Have they confirmed anything or does anyone who was having trouble and is using Google msp5 at MICE currently still have issues? Thanks, anthony 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

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Frank Bulk

I’m not sure how many companies are also interested in this, but if it could be used by Calix or Vantage Point’s CAF II-based broadband testing solutions, we would be interested in financially supporting this. Frank From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay Hanke Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2019 11:13 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server Was there any progress on this? -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io<mailto:jayhanke@southfront.io> Phone 612-204-0000 ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE Google Traffic

by Frank Bulk

It seems a bit odd that it floats so evenly at ~56 Gbps most of the day: http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti/graph.php?action=view&local_graph_id=124… Does that seem right? Frank From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Mike Wilker Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2019 9:32 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Google Traffic Thanks for the update Jeremy. Thank You, Mike Wilker CTO • Office: (507) 214-0259 • Email: mwilker(a)jagcom.net<mailto:mwilker@jagcom.net> [http://cdn.jagcom.net/images/logos/JaguarLogo2014.png] www.JagCom.net<http://www.jagcom.net/> 213 South Oak Avenue Owatonna, MN 55060 On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 7:31 AM Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com<mailto:jlumby@mnvoip.com>> wrote: I just got the official word back from Google that everything should be stable. From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET>] On Behalf Of AnthonyAnderberg(a)nuvera.net<mailto:AnthonyAnderberg@nuvera.net> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2019 11:44 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET<mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Google Traffic It looks like Google’s MICE traffic levels are significantly higher tonight - not as high as they’d been, but I suspect a lot of us are still suppressing our prefixes to them at MICE. Have they confirmed anything or does anyone who was having trouble and is using Google msp5 at MICE currently still have issues? Thanks, anthony [Anthony_Anderberg]<https://www.nuvera.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

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Dean Bahls

Politicians aren’t Internet savvy. So it ends up in the wrong place. *sigh* Dean From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay Hanke Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2019 5:34 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE attached compliance speed test server Interesting, I wonder how they came up with St Paul (no public IXP). Also Omaha is missing last I looked, Omaha was larger than KCIX. If someone implements something in St. Paul. I have some networks looking for test locations. It might bring more eyeballs to mice. On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 5:00 PM Richard Laager <rlaager(a)wiktel.com <mailto:rlaager@wiktel.com> > wrote: On 2/24/19 4:43 PM, Jay Hanke wrote: > Is there a public FCC doc someplace? I think this is the one, but I'm really not positive on that. FCC stuff isn't my area of expertise. https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-18-710A1.pdf -- Richard -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io <mailto:jayhanke@southfront.io> Phone 612-204-0000 _____ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS <http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1> &A=1

Feb. 25, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Jay Hanke

Interesting, I wonder how they came up with St Paul (no public IXP). Also Omaha is missing last I looked, Omaha was larger than KCIX. If someone implements something in St. Paul. I have some networks looking for test locations. It might bring more eyeballs to mice. On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 5:00 PM Richard Laager <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: > On 2/24/19 4:43 PM, Jay Hanke wrote: > > Is there a public FCC doc someplace? > > I think this is the one, but I'm really not positive on that. FCC stuff > isn't my area of expertise. > https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-18-710A1.pdf > > -- > Richard > -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 24, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Richard Laager

On 2/24/19 4:43 PM, Jay Hanke wrote: > Is there a public FCC doc someplace? I think this is the one, but I'm really not positive on that. FCC stuff isn't my area of expertise. https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-18-710A1.pdf -- Richard

Feb. 24, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Jay Hanke

Is there a public FCC doc someplace? On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 4:39 PM Darin Steffl <darin.steffl(a)mnwifi.com> wrote: > US internet ookla server has always given us good results. > > On Sun, Feb 24, 2019, 4:36 PM Richard Laager <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: > >> On 2/24/19 11:13 AM, Jay Hanke wrote: >> > Was there any progress on this? >> >> I believe Steve decided to keep his iperf server private. >> >> U.S. Internet is connected to MICE and already has a public Ookla >> speedtest.net server (listed as being in Minneapolis). >> >> My understanding is that currently the FCC requirement is for St. Paul, >> so I'm not sure if Minneapolis "counts". >> >> -- >> Richard >> > > ------------------------------ > > 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, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 24, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Darin Steffl

US internet ookla server has always given us good results. On Sun, Feb 24, 2019, 4:36 PM Richard Laager <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: > On 2/24/19 11:13 AM, Jay Hanke wrote: > > Was there any progress on this? > > I believe Steve decided to keep his iperf server private. > > U.S. Internet is connected to MICE and already has a public Ookla > speedtest.net server (listed as being in Minneapolis). > > My understanding is that currently the FCC requirement is for St. Paul, > so I'm not sure if Minneapolis "counts". > > -- > Richard >

Feb. 24, 2019

Re: MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Richard Laager

On 2/24/19 11:13 AM, Jay Hanke wrote: > Was there any progress on this? I believe Steve decided to keep his iperf server private. U.S. Internet is connected to MICE and already has a public Ookla speedtest.net server (listed as being in Minneapolis). My understanding is that currently the FCC requirement is for St. Paul, so I'm not sure if Minneapolis "counts". -- Richard

Feb. 24, 2019

Re: Zayo MICE Remote

by Jay Hanke

Of the affected remote participants, has everyone opened a Zayo ticket? On Sun, Feb 24, 2019 at 12:50 PM James Urwiller < james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> wrote: > nothing. :(. > > Sent from my iPhone 7 > > > On Feb 24, 2019, at 12:39, Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com> wrote: > > > > Any update from Zayo or anyone else? The graph last night recorded > 20.07 Gbps. > > > > Frank > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of James > Urwiller > > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 3:36 PM > > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > > > Well my ticket is now in the hands of design/architecture @ Zayo. Will > see > > if I get any response from them. > > > > James Urwiller > > Network Architect > > Stealth Broadband > > james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: James Urwiller <james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 11:59 > > To: 'MICE Discuss' <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> > > Subject: RE: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > > > I called and opened a ticket regarding this.. I'll see what kind of > mischief > > I can cause > > > > James Urwiller > > Network Architect > > Stealth Broadband > > james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jeremy > > Lumby > > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 19:14 > > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > > > Just an FYI: > > > > In the event that one of the members in Belle Plaine needs a quick > > alternate route, I do have transport capacity between Belle Plaine, and > my > > MICE extension switch. I could potentially get you moved as fast as 1-2 > > business days. > > > > > > Jeremy Lumby > > Minnesota VoIP > > 9217 17th Ave S > > Suite 216 > > Bloomington, MN 55425 > > Main: 612-355-7740 x211 > > Direct: 612-392-6814 > > EFax: 952-873-7425 > > jlumby(a)mnvoip.com > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of > > Richard Laager > > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 7:04 PM > > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > > Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > > > The 20G backhaul from the Zayo MICE remote in Belle Plaine to the MICE > Core > > Switch has recently exceeded 17G, 18G, and even 19G on the Cacti graphs. > > > > I initially reported this to Zayo on January 14th. We preemptively > allocated > > another 10G port on January 17th in an attempt to streamline the > upgrade. I > > asked for a status update on January 24th. Today, I contacted Zayo again > > stressing the seriousness and urgency of the situation. The upgrade does > > seem to be moving forward again, but Zayo has not provided an estimate on > > when the upgrade will be complete. > > > > Given that the backhaul hit 19.73G last night, I'm bringing this to the > > attention of the participants, who may wish to take some action (e.g. > > shifting traffic). > > > > -- > > Richard > > > -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 24, 2019

Re: Zayo MICE Remote

by James Urwiller

nothing. :(. Sent from my iPhone 7 > On Feb 24, 2019, at 12:39, Frank Bulk <fbulk(a)mypremieronline.com> wrote: > > Any update from Zayo or anyone else? The graph last night recorded 20.07 Gbps. > > Frank > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of James Urwiller > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 3:36 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > Well my ticket is now in the hands of design/architecture @ Zayo. Will see > if I get any response from them. > > James Urwiller > Network Architect > Stealth Broadband > james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Urwiller <james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 11:59 > To: 'MICE Discuss' <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> > Subject: RE: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > I called and opened a ticket regarding this.. I'll see what kind of mischief > I can cause > > James Urwiller > Network Architect > Stealth Broadband > james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com > > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jeremy > Lumby > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 19:14 > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > Just an FYI: > > In the event that one of the members in Belle Plaine needs a quick > alternate route, I do have transport capacity between Belle Plaine, and my > MICE extension switch. I could potentially get you moved as fast as 1-2 > business days. > > > Jeremy Lumby > Minnesota VoIP > 9217 17th Ave S > Suite 216 > Bloomington, MN 55425 > Main: 612-355-7740 x211 > Direct: 612-392-6814 > EFax: 952-873-7425 > jlumby(a)mnvoip.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of > Richard Laager > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 7:04 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > The 20G backhaul from the Zayo MICE remote in Belle Plaine to the MICE Core > Switch has recently exceeded 17G, 18G, and even 19G on the Cacti graphs. > > I initially reported this to Zayo on January 14th. We preemptively allocated > another 10G port on January 17th in an attempt to streamline the upgrade. I > asked for a status update on January 24th. Today, I contacted Zayo again > stressing the seriousness and urgency of the situation. The upgrade does > seem to be moving forward again, but Zayo has not provided an estimate on > when the upgrade will be complete. > > Given that the backhaul hit 19.73G last night, I'm bringing this to the > attention of the participants, who may wish to take some action (e.g. > shifting traffic). > > -- > Richard >

Feb. 24, 2019

Re: Zayo MICE Remote

by Frank Bulk

Any update from Zayo or anyone else? The graph last night recorded 20.07 Gbps. Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of James Urwiller Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 3:36 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote Well my ticket is now in the hands of design/architecture @ Zayo. Will see if I get any response from them. James Urwiller Network Architect Stealth Broadband james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com -----Original Message----- From: James Urwiller <james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 11:59 To: 'MICE Discuss' <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: RE: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote I called and opened a ticket regarding this.. I'll see what kind of mischief I can cause James Urwiller Network Architect Stealth Broadband james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jeremy Lumby Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 19:14 To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote Just an FYI: In the event that one of the members in Belle Plaine needs a quick alternate route, I do have transport capacity between Belle Plaine, and my MICE extension switch. I could potentially get you moved as fast as 1-2 business days. Jeremy Lumby Minnesota VoIP 9217 17th Ave S Suite 216 Bloomington, MN 55425 Main: 612-355-7740 x211 Direct: 612-392-6814 EFax: 952-873-7425 jlumby(a)mnvoip.com -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 7:04 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote The 20G backhaul from the Zayo MICE remote in Belle Plaine to the MICE Core Switch has recently exceeded 17G, 18G, and even 19G on the Cacti graphs. I initially reported this to Zayo on January 14th. We preemptively allocated another 10G port on January 17th in an attempt to streamline the upgrade. I asked for a status update on January 24th. Today, I contacted Zayo again stressing the seriousness and urgency of the situation. The upgrade does seem to be moving forward again, but Zayo has not provided an estimate on when the upgrade will be complete. Given that the backhaul hit 19.73G last night, I'm bringing this to the attention of the participants, who may wish to take some action (e.g. shifting traffic). -- Richard

Feb. 24, 2019

MICE attached compliance speed test server

by Jay Hanke

Was there any progress on this? -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 24, 2019

Re: Zayo MICE Remote

by James Urwiller

Well my ticket is now in the hands of design/architecture @ Zayo. Will see if I get any response from them. James Urwiller Network Architect Stealth Broadband james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com -----Original Message----- From: James Urwiller <james.urwiller(a)turnkey-telecom.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 11:59 To: 'MICE Discuss' <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> Subject: RE: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote I called and opened a ticket regarding this.. I'll see what kind of mischief I can cause James Urwiller Network Architect Stealth Broadband james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jeremy Lumby Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 19:14 To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote Just an FYI: In the event that one of the members in Belle Plaine needs a quick alternate route, I do have transport capacity between Belle Plaine, and my MICE extension switch. I could potentially get you moved as fast as 1-2 business days. Jeremy Lumby Minnesota VoIP 9217 17th Ave S Suite 216 Bloomington, MN 55425 Main: 612-355-7740 x211 Direct: 612-392-6814 EFax: 952-873-7425 jlumby(a)mnvoip.com -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 7:04 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote The 20G backhaul from the Zayo MICE remote in Belle Plaine to the MICE Core Switch has recently exceeded 17G, 18G, and even 19G on the Cacti graphs. I initially reported this to Zayo on January 14th. We preemptively allocated another 10G port on January 17th in an attempt to streamline the upgrade. I asked for a status update on January 24th. Today, I contacted Zayo again stressing the seriousness and urgency of the situation. The upgrade does seem to be moving forward again, but Zayo has not provided an estimate on when the upgrade will be complete. Given that the backhaul hit 19.73G last night, I'm bringing this to the attention of the participants, who may wish to take some action (e.g. shifting traffic). -- Richard

Feb. 20, 2019

Re: Zayo MICE Remote

by James Urwiller

I called and opened a ticket regarding this.. I'll see what kind of mischief I can cause James Urwiller Network Architect Stealth Broadband james.urwiller(a)stealthbroadband.com -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jeremy Lumby Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 19:14 To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote Just an FYI: In the event that one of the members in Belle Plaine needs a quick alternate route, I do have transport capacity between Belle Plaine, and my MICE extension switch. I could potentially get you moved as fast as 1-2 business days. Jeremy Lumby Minnesota VoIP 9217 17th Ave S Suite 216 Bloomington, MN 55425 Main: 612-355-7740 x211 Direct: 612-392-6814 EFax: 952-873-7425 jlumby(a)mnvoip.com -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 7:04 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote The 20G backhaul from the Zayo MICE remote in Belle Plaine to the MICE Core Switch has recently exceeded 17G, 18G, and even 19G on the Cacti graphs. I initially reported this to Zayo on January 14th. We preemptively allocated another 10G port on January 17th in an attempt to streamline the upgrade. I asked for a status update on January 24th. Today, I contacted Zayo again stressing the seriousness and urgency of the situation. The upgrade does seem to be moving forward again, but Zayo has not provided an estimate on when the upgrade will be complete. Given that the backhaul hit 19.73G last night, I'm bringing this to the attention of the participants, who may wish to take some action (e.g. shifting traffic). -- Richard

Feb. 20, 2019

Re: Zayo MICE Remote

by Reid Fishler

I have transport as well. Reid On Mon, Feb 18, 2019, 5:14 PM Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com wrote: > Just an FYI: > > In the event that one of the members in Belle Plaine needs a quick > alternate route, I do have transport capacity between Belle Plaine, and my > MICE extension switch. I could potentially get you moved as fast as 1-2 > business days. > > > Jeremy Lumby > Minnesota VoIP > 9217 17th Ave S > Suite 216 > Bloomington, MN 55425 > Main: 612-355-7740 x211 > Direct: 612-392-6814 > EFax: 952-873-7425 > jlumby(a)mnvoip.com > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of > Richard Laager > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 7:04 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote > > The 20G backhaul from the Zayo MICE remote in Belle Plaine to the MICE > Core Switch has recently exceeded 17G, 18G, and even 19G on the Cacti > graphs. > > I initially reported this to Zayo on January 14th. We preemptively > allocated another 10G port on January 17th in an attempt to streamline > the upgrade. I asked for a status update on January 24th. Today, I > contacted Zayo again stressing the seriousness and urgency of the > situation. The upgrade does seem to be moving forward again, but Zayo > has not provided an estimate on when the upgrade will be complete. > > Given that the backhaul hit 19.73G last night, I'm bringing this to the > attention of the participants, who may wish to take some action (e.g. > shifting traffic). > > -- > Richard > >

Feb. 19, 2019

Re: Zayo MICE Remote

by Jeremy Lumby

Just an FYI: In the event that one of the members in Belle Plaine needs a quick alternate route, I do have transport capacity between Belle Plaine, and my MICE extension switch. I could potentially get you moved as fast as 1-2 business days. Jeremy Lumby Minnesota VoIP 9217 17th Ave S Suite 216 Bloomington, MN 55425 Main: 612-355-7740 x211 Direct: 612-392-6814 EFax: 952-873-7425 jlumby(a)mnvoip.com -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Richard Laager Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 7:04 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Zayo MICE Remote The 20G backhaul from the Zayo MICE remote in Belle Plaine to the MICE Core Switch has recently exceeded 17G, 18G, and even 19G on the Cacti graphs. I initially reported this to Zayo on January 14th. We preemptively allocated another 10G port on January 17th in an attempt to streamline the upgrade. I asked for a status update on January 24th. Today, I contacted Zayo again stressing the seriousness and urgency of the situation. The upgrade does seem to be moving forward again, but Zayo has not provided an estimate on when the upgrade will be complete. Given that the backhaul hit 19.73G last night, I'm bringing this to the attention of the participants, who may wish to take some action (e.g. shifting traffic). -- Richard

Feb. 19, 2019

Zayo MICE Remote

by Richard Laager

The 20G backhaul from the Zayo MICE remote in Belle Plaine to the MICE Core Switch has recently exceeded 17G, 18G, and even 19G on the Cacti graphs. I initially reported this to Zayo on January 14th. We preemptively allocated another 10G port on January 17th in an attempt to streamline the upgrade. I asked for a status update on January 24th. Today, I contacted Zayo again stressing the seriousness and urgency of the situation. The upgrade does seem to be moving forward again, but Zayo has not provided an estimate on when the upgrade will be complete. Given that the backhaul hit 19.73G last night, I'm bringing this to the attention of the participants, who may wish to take some action (e.g. shifting traffic). -- Richard

Feb. 19, 2019

SFN Remote Switch Activated

by Jay Hanke

The SFN Remote switch has been activated. -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 15, 2019

Re: MICE Google Traffic

by Mike Wilker

Thanks for the update Jeremy. Thank You, Mike Wilker CTO ( Office: (507) 214-0259 - Email: mwilker(a)jagcom.net www.JagCom.net <http://www.jagcom.net/> 213 South Oak Avenue Owatonna, MN 55060 On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 7:31 AM Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com> wrote: > I just got the official word back from Google that everything should be > stable. > > > > *From:* MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] *On Behalf > Of *AnthonyAnderberg(a)nuvera.net > *Sent:* Friday, February 01, 2019 11:44 PM > *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > *Subject:* [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Google Traffic > > > > It looks like Google’s MICE traffic levels are significantly higher > tonight - not as high as they’d been, but I suspect a lot of us are still > suppressing our prefixes to them at MICE. > > > > Have they confirmed anything or does anyone who was having trouble and is > using Google msp5 at MICE currently still have issues? > > > > Thanks, > > anthony > > > > [image: Anthony_Anderberg] <https://www.nuvera.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 >

Feb. 12, 2019

Re: MICE Google Traffic

by Jeremy Lumby

I just got the official word back from Google that everything should be stable. From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of AnthonyAnderberg(a)nuvera.net Sent: Friday, February 01, 2019 11:44 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE Google Traffic It looks like Google’s MICE traffic levels are significantly higher tonight - not as high as they’d been, but I suspect a lot of us are still suppressing our prefixes to them at MICE. Have they confirmed anything or does anyone who was having trouble and is using Google msp5 at MICE currently still have issues? Thanks, anthony To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Feb. 12, 2019

Re: Strange log message on our Arista regarding MICE traffic

by Frank Bulk

Aren't the two log lines indicating that our router saw the next hop from the MICE RR's? Can the RR's be configured to filter out "bad" addresses? Frank -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Doug McIntyre Sent: Friday, February 08, 2019 3:55 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Strange log message on our Arista regarding MICE traffic On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 02:55:08PM -0600, Richard Laager wrote: >On 2/8/19 2:30 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: >> I saw the following Thursday afternoon: >> >> Feb 7 15:21:54 207.32.15.28 Rib: mpbgp_recv_mpreach: peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 (AS 53679) link-local next hop fe80::e2ac:f1ef:fe4b:d93b%10000 improper, ignoring this next-hop >> Feb 7 15:22:09 207.32.15.28 Rib: mpbgp_recv_mpreach: peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:2 (AS 53679) link-local next hop fe80::e2ac:f1ef:fe4b:d93b%10000 improper, ignoring this next-hop > >That link local address seems to (other than a 2 vs 0) match MAC address >e0ac.f14b.d93b, which is currently in my ARP cache for 206.108.255.119, >which is Paul Bunyan Telephone. I wonder if their router advertised a >link local nexthop to the route servers. If Frank is setting the packet on his router from fe80::e2ac:f1ef:fe4b:d39b, it probably came directly across the wire, not bounced off the route-reflectors, which would add in their own link-local address. >Perhaps the route servers should be filtering the next hop? At a >minimum, it seems like we should limit it to the MICE address space. But >if trivial to implement, it would be best if the nexthop was that of the >peer. They do have some filtering. The next-hop for anything coming in should be the peer address already? In this case, it looks like some freaky BGP went out, and Frank's router ignored it. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Feb. 8, 2019

Re: Strange log message on our Arista regarding MICE traffic

by Doug McIntyre

On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 02:55:08PM -0600, Richard Laager wrote: >On 2/8/19 2:30 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: >> I saw the following Thursday afternoon: >> >> Feb 7 15:21:54 207.32.15.28 Rib: mpbgp_recv_mpreach: peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 (AS 53679) link-local next hop fe80::e2ac:f1ef:fe4b:d93b%10000 improper, ignoring this next-hop >> Feb 7 15:22:09 207.32.15.28 Rib: mpbgp_recv_mpreach: peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:2 (AS 53679) link-local next hop fe80::e2ac:f1ef:fe4b:d93b%10000 improper, ignoring this next-hop > >That link local address seems to (other than a 2 vs 0) match MAC address >e0ac.f14b.d93b, which is currently in my ARP cache for 206.108.255.119, >which is Paul Bunyan Telephone. I wonder if their router advertised a >link local nexthop to the route servers. If Frank is setting the packet on his router from fe80::e2ac:f1ef:fe4b:d39b, it probably came directly across the wire, not bounced off the route-reflectors, which would add in their own link-local address. >Perhaps the route servers should be filtering the next hop? At a >minimum, it seems like we should limit it to the MICE address space. But >if trivial to implement, it would be best if the nexthop was that of the >peer. They do have some filtering. The next-hop for anything coming in should be the peer address already? In this case, it looks like some freaky BGP went out, and Frank's router ignored it. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Feb. 8, 2019

Re: Strange log message on our Arista regarding MICE traffic

by Steve Howard

Feb. 8, 2019

Re: Strange log message on our Arista regarding MICE traffic

by Richard Laager

On 2/8/19 2:30 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: > I saw the following Thursday afternoon: > > Feb 7 15:21:54 207.32.15.28 Rib: mpbgp_recv_mpreach: peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 (AS 53679) link-local next hop fe80::e2ac:f1ef:fe4b:d93b%10000 improper, ignoring this next-hop > Feb 7 15:22:09 207.32.15.28 Rib: mpbgp_recv_mpreach: peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:2 (AS 53679) link-local next hop fe80::e2ac:f1ef:fe4b:d93b%10000 improper, ignoring this next-hop That link local address seems to (other than a 2 vs 0) match MAC address e0ac.f14b.d93b, which is currently in my ARP cache for 206.108.255.119, which is Paul Bunyan Telephone. I wonder if their router advertised a link local nexthop to the route servers. Perhaps the route servers should be filtering the next hop? At a minimum, it seems like we should limit it to the MICE address space. But if trivial to implement, it would be best if the nexthop was that of the peer. -- Richard

Feb. 8, 2019

Re: Strange log message on our Arista regarding MICE traffic

by Doug McIntyre

On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 08:30:04PM +0000, Frank Bulk wrote: >I saw the following Thursday afternoon: > >Feb 7 15:21:54 207.32.15.28 Rib: mpbgp_recv_mpreach: peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 (AS 53679) link-local next hop fe80::e2ac:f1ef:fe4b:d93b%10000 improper, ignoring this next-hop >Feb 7 15:22:09 207.32.15.28 Rib: mpbgp_recv_mpreach: peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:2 (AS 53679) link-local next hop fe80::e2ac:f1ef:fe4b:d93b%10000 improper, ignoring this next-hop > >Was someone working on the router reflectors? No, nobody was logged into them on 2/7/2018 at all. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Feb. 8, 2019

Strange log message on our Arista regarding MICE traffic

by Frank Bulk

I saw the following Thursday afternoon: Feb 7 15:21:54 207.32.15.28 Rib: mpbgp_recv_mpreach: peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:1 (AS 53679) link-local next hop fe80::e2ac:f1ef:fe4b:d93b%10000 improper, ignoring this next-hop Feb 7 15:22:09 207.32.15.28 Rib: mpbgp_recv_mpreach: peer 2001:504:27::d1af:0:2 (AS 53679) link-local next hop fe80::e2ac:f1ef:fe4b:d93b%10000 improper, ignoring this next-hop Was someone working on the router reflectors? Frank

Feb. 8, 2019

Re: Netflix 100G Port Move

by Richard Laager

On 2/7/19 2:52 PM, Jay Hanke wrote: > Netflix will be moving their existing 100G Port > > From: > Ethernet 4/49/1 > > To: > Ethernet 3/11/1 I updated the participants list. Since we are moving this, I just made the change now, rather than documenting it as a pending move. -- Richard

Feb. 7, 2019

Netflix 100G Port Move

by Jay Hanke

Netflix will be moving their existing 100G Port From: Ethernet 4/49/1 To: Ethernet 3/11/1 The port move is to free up an additional non-slot 3 100G port. Thanks!!! -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 7, 2019

Facebook Port Upgrade

by Jay Hanke

Facebook will be upgrading their existing 2x2x10G to 2x1x100G. The new 100G ports are as follows: Ethernet5/50/1 Ethernet3/10/1 Welcome aboard again! -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

Feb. 7, 2019

Re: IPv6 Testing Service

by Andrew Hoyos

https://ring.nlnog.net Or for something simple: https://tools.keycdn.com/ipv6-ping https://tools.keycdn.com/traceroute -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com > On Feb 6, 2019, at 10:51 PM, Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com> wrote: > > Does anyone know of a service that will test connectivity to your network from multiple locations on multiple ISPs using IPv6? I have seen several for IPv4, however not much in the way of IPv6 > > > Jeremy Lumby > Minnesota VoIP > 9217 17th Ave S > Suite 216 > Bloomington, MN 55425 > Main: 612-355-7740 x211 > Direct: 612-392-6814 > EFax: 952-873-7425 > jlumby(a)mnvoip.com

Feb. 7, 2019