- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Donation Thank You

by Jason Hanke

Please thank Hoyos Consulting for a $2100 Paypal donation this morning! -- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net

Oct. 25, 2016

Please welcome Fastly to MICE!

by Jason Hanke

Name: Fastly, Inc ASN: 54113 IPv4: 206.108.255.72/24 IPv4: 206.108.255.73/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:d361::1/64 IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:d361::2/64 Ports: Main Switch xe-2/0/25, xe-2/0/26 (NO LAG) Contact: peering(a)fastly.com Route Server and website please, I'm checking on BFD support. Welcome aboard! -- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net

Oct. 25, 2016

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

by Mike Horwath

On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 07:34:00AM -0500, Jeremy Lumby wrote: > If MICE had been built on a surplus of cash, and not donated > time/hardware, then I would feel much different. Hear hear! -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Oct. 25, 2016

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

by Jeremy Lumby

As one of the other 60+ members, I am offering my $0.02. Honestly I think Doug has gone above, and beyond with his notification window, as well as willingness to do it during a low traffic period. If I was the one doing the work, it would be in the middle of the day, and would be thrown together at the last minute when I happened to know I was going past Cologix for some other reason. Since there have never been port fees, and even when they do come about, there is a lot of opposition to making them mandatory, or recurring, I think the membership needs to judge the exchange on the value it has been, and will be providing, and not some formalized service level agreement that in the industry is typically just a document that says if we screw up here is how much we will refund. I feel it is far more important to allow Doug to do it on his time since people like him have made the donations that are the only reason that MICE has made it as far and done as well as it has. If MICE had been built on a surplus of cash, and not donated time/hardware, then I would feel much different. 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 Andrew Hoyos Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 12:00 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] MICE core switch maintenance window - 10/27/2016 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT On Oct 24, 2016, at 11:29 PM, Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 08:22:46PM -0500, Andrew Hoyos wrote: >> Also, given how big MICE has become and some of the players involved, I’d think we can do better than 3 days advance notice on service affecting work that will take down the the majority of the IX? > > OOTH, if you get out past 7 days you have the problem that people > forget about the window, and are blindsided by it actually happening. > I get more complaints about further out windows than shorter. Hrm, 7-10 days seems to be industry standard for this sort of thing, and in practice, I personally have never had anyone complain about providing *more* advance notice for service affecting work. Calendars and all….. > I would typically aim for 6 days, but didn't want to do it during MEA, > and now Holloween is coming up as well. Given 2.5 solid days (not > weekend), went with a window that fit around my and other's schedule. Understood, and truly appreciate you volunteering to do the work, however, what about the input of the other 60+ members of MICE into this? Unless I've completely missed something, this all seems very unstructured and ad-hoc. Board folks and community - I’d encourage some more discussion here on governance of the technical side of the IX, including how and when changes are scheduled/approved, and perhaps some formalization of a technical committee. I think we’ve reached a point where continuing to do things ad-hoc paints a shaky picture. -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com

Oct. 25, 2016

Re: MICE Port Runout

by Shaun Carlson

Andrew, that is my understanding as well from previous research. Basically, once you file, assume the status is approved. The status will be retroactive to the date of filing. It's the IRS' was of saying, we know we'll take a while, so don't wait up on our account. s Shaun Carlson Director of Information Technology | Arvig ph: (218) 346.8673 | em: shaun.carlson(a)arvig.com On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 10:28 PM -0500, "Andrew Hoyos" <hoyosa(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 24, 2016, at 10:19 PM, Richard Laager wrote: > > On 10/24/2016 09:56 PM, Larry Patterson wrote: >> So assuming paperwork happens in a timely fashion, donations after the >> filing date would be tax deductible for 2016? Is that the agreed upon >> direction? If so, I would suggest we get some end of year charitable >> giving going on. I would be interested in participating. What do the >> lawyers say about 2016 vs. 2017 status? > > Assuming the IRS accepts our application, I'm not sure how retroactive > it will be. IANAL, but: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/tax-law-compliance-before-exempt-… and https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-organizations/contribu… Seems to imply that 2016 contributions would be safe (as long as the MICE legal entity was planning on filing a 990 for 2016 for income/donations received). -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com

Oct. 25, 2016

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

by Andrew Hoyos

On Oct 24, 2016, at 1:20 PM, Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> wrote: > > We're going to upgrade the core MICE 10G switches coming up this week > on Wednesday night/ Thursday morning at 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT on 27 October. This should probably be sent to MICE-ANNOUNCE as well. -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com

Oct. 25, 2016

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

by Andrew Hoyos

On Oct 24, 2016, at 11:29 PM, Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 08:22:46PM -0500, Andrew Hoyos wrote: >> Also, given how big MICE has become and some of the players involved, I’d think we can do better than 3 days advance notice on service affecting work that will take down the the majority of the IX? > > OOTH, if you get out past 7 days you have the problem that people > forget about the window, and are blindsided by it actually happening. > I get more complaints about further out windows than shorter. Hrm, 7-10 days seems to be industry standard for this sort of thing, and in practice, I personally have never had anyone complain about providing *more* advance notice for service affecting work. Calendars and all….. > I would typically aim for 6 days, but didn't want to do it during MEA, > and now Holloween is coming up as well. Given 2.5 solid days (not > weekend), went with a window that fit around my and other's schedule. Understood, and truly appreciate you volunteering to do the work, however, what about the input of the other 60+ members of MICE into this? Unless I've completely missed something, this all seems very unstructured and ad-hoc. Board folks and community - I’d encourage some more discussion here on governance of the technical side of the IX, including how and when changes are scheduled/approved, and perhaps some formalization of a technical committee. I think we’ve reached a point where continuing to do things ad-hoc paints a shaky picture. -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com

Oct. 25, 2016

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

by Doug McIntyre

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 08:14:17PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote: > On 10/24/2016 01:20 PM, Doug McIntyre wrote: > > We're going to upgrade the core MICE 10G switches > > Has it been MICE practice to block BGP using a L4 ACL before the > maintenance? There hasn't been that many maintenance periods, like 3 events, one was unintended AFAIK. But we could, it wouldn't be too difficult. > Something like this: > https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/wednesday.general-lt.hargrave.ixp… I can implement this 5 minutes before the upgrade. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Oct. 25, 2016

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

by Doug McIntyre

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 08:22:46PM -0500, Andrew Hoyos wrote: > Also, given how big MICE has become and some of the players involved, I’d think we can do better than 3 days advance notice on service affecting work that will take down the the majority of the IX? OOTH, if you get out past 7 days you have the problem that people forget about the window, and are blindsided by it actually happening. I get more complaints about further out windows than shorter. I would typically aim for 6 days, but didn't want to do it during MEA, and now Holloween is coming up as well. Given 2.5 solid days (not weekend), went with a window that fit around my and other's schedule. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Oct. 25, 2016

Re: MICE Port Runout

by Andrew Hoyos

> On Oct 24, 2016, at 10:19 PM, Richard Laager <rlaager(a)WIKTEL.COM> wrote: > > On 10/24/2016 09:56 PM, Larry Patterson wrote: >> So assuming paperwork happens in a timely fashion, donations after the >> filing date would be tax deductible for 2016? Is that the agreed upon >> direction? If so, I would suggest we get some end of year charitable >> giving going on. I would be interested in participating. What do the >> lawyers say about 2016 vs. 2017 status? > > Assuming the IRS accepts our application, I'm not sure how retroactive > it will be. IANAL, but: https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/tax-law-compliance-before-exempt-… and https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-organizations/contribu… Seems to imply that 2016 contributions would be safe (as long as the MICE legal entity was planning on filing a 990 for 2016 for income/donations received). -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com

Oct. 25, 2016

Re: MICE Port Runout

by Richard Laager

On 10/24/2016 09:56 PM, Larry Patterson wrote: > So assuming paperwork happens in a timely fashion, donations after the > filing date would be tax deductible for 2016? Is that the agreed upon > direction? If so, I would suggest we get some end of year charitable > giving going on. I would be interested in participating. What do the > lawyers say about 2016 vs. 2017 status? Assuming the IRS accepts our application, I'm not sure how retroactive it will be. -- Richard

Oct. 25, 2016

Re: MICE Port Runout

by Larry Patterson

So assuming paperwork happens in a timely fashion, donations after the filing date would be tax deductible for 2016? Is that the agreed upon direction? If so, I would suggest we get some end of year charitable giving going on. I would be interested in participating. What do the lawyers say about 2016 vs. 2017 status? Sent from my iPhone Larry Patterson Chief Technology Officer ---- Atomic Data(r) // Safe. Simple. Smart.(tm) 615 North 3rd Street Minneapolis, MN 55401 Main // 612.466.2000 Direct // 612.466.2080 It's official. We're SOC 3 Certified, again!<http://www.atomicdata.com/articles/atomic-data%C2%AE-keeps-client%E2%80%99s…> > On Oct 24, 2016, at 21:47, Richard Laager <rlaager(a)WIKTEL.COM> wrote: > >> On 10/24/2016 08:54 PM, Larry Patterson wrote: >> Is MICE a non-profit yet or will it be by End of year? > > Not yet, and I can't guarantee it. > > I'm currently waiting on the Minnesota Secretary of State's office to > accept a filing. I expected it to be done last week. I'm doing some > overnight maintenance, so my schedule is off-cycle of normal business > hours. I've emailed them just now to inquire about the status. > > Once that is done, I'll request certified copies, which I expect to take > a few days. Assuming the rest of the board has no objections, I'll sign > and file the IRS form. > > I'm gone for a couple weeks starting next week. So this may get delayed > until I'm back. But worst case, this really should be mailed to the IRS > no later than November 18th. > > -- > Richard

Oct. 25, 2016

Re: MICE Port Runout

by Richard Laager

On 10/24/2016 08:54 PM, Larry Patterson wrote: > Is MICE a non-profit yet or will it be by End of year? Not yet, and I can't guarantee it. I'm currently waiting on the Minnesota Secretary of State's office to accept a filing. I expected it to be done last week. I'm doing some overnight maintenance, so my schedule is off-cycle of normal business hours. I've emailed them just now to inquire about the status. Once that is done, I'll request certified copies, which I expect to take a few days. Assuming the rest of the board has no objections, I'll sign and file the IRS form. I'm gone for a couple weeks starting next week. So this may get delayed until I'm back. But worst case, this really should be mailed to the IRS no later than November 18th. -- Richard

Oct. 25, 2016

Re: MICE Port Runout

by Larry Patterson

Is MICE a non-profit yet or will it be by End of year? Sent from my iPhone Larry Patterson Chief Technology Officer ---- Atomic Data(r) // Safe. Simple. Smart.(tm) 615 North 3rd Street Minneapolis, MN 55401 Main // 612.466.2000 Direct // 612.466.2080 It's official. We're SOC 3 Certified, again!<http://www.atomicdata.com/articles/atomic-data%C2%AE-keeps-client%E2%80%99s…> > On Oct 24, 2016, at 17:41, Jason Hanke <jayhanke(a)NEUTRALPATH.NET> wrote: > > We are starting to run low on ports on the main switch. > > If you or your company cares deeply about the quality of internet this > would be a great time to consider a donation of $ or gear. > > -- > Jay Hanke > CTO > Neutral Path Communications > 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 > Mankato, MN 56001 > (507) 327-2398 mobile > jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net > www.neutralpath.net<http://www.neutralpath.net>

Oct. 25, 2016

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

by Andrew Hoyos

On Oct 24, 2016, at 8:14 PM, Richard Laager <rlaager(a)WIKTEL.COM> wrote: > > Has it been MICE practice to block BGP using a L4 ACL before the > maintenance? > > Something like this: > https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/wednesday.general-lt.hargrave.ixp… > > I know that in saying this, I'm basically volunteering others to do more > work, but... We move a lot of bits now, and I think it's important we do > what we can to gracefully move the traffic. I was actually in the process of penning a similar note (or suggesting at a minimum, a mass-shutdown of sessions on the route servers pre-work). Would go along way in “doing no harm” as things are rebooting and flapping up/down. Richard - I’d happily help with this in coming up with an ACL that works, and any testing. Also, given how big MICE has become and some of the players involved, I’d think we can do better than 3 days advance notice on service affecting work that will take down the the majority of the IX? Do we have standards there as far as this sort of work goes (and along those lines, peer/tech committee review of work/plan, change approval, etc)? If not, perhaps a topic for next meeting. My $0.02, ymmv... -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com

Oct. 25, 2016

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

by Richard Laager

On 10/24/2016 01:20 PM, Doug McIntyre wrote: > We're going to upgrade the core MICE 10G switches Has it been MICE practice to block BGP using a L4 ACL before the maintenance? Something like this: https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/wednesday.general-lt.hargrave.ixp… I know that in saying this, I'm basically volunteering others to do more work, but... We move a lot of bits now, and I think it's important we do what we can to gracefully move the traffic. -- Richard

Oct. 25, 2016

MICE Port Runout

by Jason Hanke

We are starting to run low on ports on the main switch. If you or your company cares deeply about the quality of internet this would be a great time to consider a donation of $ or gear. -- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net

Oct. 24, 2016

Please Welcome Unggoy Broadband to MICE!

by Jason Hanke

Name: Unggoy Broadband LLC ASN: 393846 IPv4: 206.108.255.41/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:6:0276::1/64 BFD: Available Contact: support(a)unggoy.net Route Servers: Yes Port: Main Switch xe-2/0/7 -- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net

Oct. 24, 2016

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

by Doug McIntyre

We're going to upgrade the core MICE 10G switches coming up this week on Wednesday night/ Thursday morning at 12:30AM-1:00AM CDT on 27 October. This will take us up the latest JTAC recommended software release, and also get a reboot in as further testing the packet loss that Jeremy is tracking down. The 1G switch stack is already at the version we are moving to, so 1G only members on it should still have connectivity to one route-server while the 10G stack does its' upgrade on both stack boxes. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Oct. 24, 2016

Re: NebraskaLink LAG Migration

by Jason Hanke

yes On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 04:05:05PM -0500, Jason Hanke wrote: >> NebraskaLink has decided to forgo lag configuration at this time. >> >> The new 10G link will have the following IP assignments: >> >> IPv4 206.108.255.71/24 >> IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:41d3::2/64 >> > > Okay, I assume the 2nd connect is still going to be coming from AS 16851 then? > > Route servers are all set. > > -- > Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> > ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ > Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades -- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net

Oct. 24, 2016

Re: NebraskaLink LAG Migration

by Doug McIntyre

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 04:05:05PM -0500, Jason Hanke wrote: > NebraskaLink has decided to forgo lag configuration at this time. > > The new 10G link will have the following IP assignments: > > IPv4 206.108.255.71/24 > IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:41d3::2/64 > Okay, I assume the 2nd connect is still going to be coming from AS 16851 then? Route servers are all set. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Oct. 24, 2016

Re: NebraskaLink LAG Migration

by Jason Hanke

NebraskaLink has decided to forgo lag configuration at this time. The new 10G link will have the following IP assignments: IPv4 206.108.255.71/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:41d3::2/64 They will connect to NP Remote Switch port xe-0/0/4. Route server and website configuration please! Thanks! Jay On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Jason Hanke <jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net> wrote: > ae1 > > On Sep 29, 2016 8:40 PM, "Richard Laager" <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: > >> On 09/29/2016 08:37 PM, Richard Laager wrote: >> > On 09/29/2016 04:34 PM, Jason Hanke wrote: >> >> Nebraskalink is adding a second 10G to their MICE connection. >> >> >> >> The additional port is xe-0/0/4 >> > >> > Will this be ae12 or non-LAG? >> >> Sorry, I see this is on the Neutral Path switch. Let me rephrase >> accordingly: >> >> Which ae interface is this, or is this non-LAG? >> >> -- >> Richard >> > -- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net

Oct. 21, 2016

Re: Please welcome Amazon to MICE!

by Gary Glissendorf

Other MICE Members said use peering(a)amazon.com to contact. One said he setup a peering somewhere else and it took 45 days for them to build. So a lot like us gary.glissendorf(a)sdncommunications.com <gary.glissendorf(a)sdncommunications.com> 2900 W. 10th St. | Sioux Falls, SD 57104 (w) 605.978.3558 | (c) 605.359-3737 | (tf) 800.247.1442 SDN NOC 877.287.8023 NOC Support email: sdnsupport(a)sdncommunications.com <sdnsupport(a)sdncommunications.com> "Be Excellent to Each Other" -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Gary Glissendorf Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 5:19 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Please welcome Amazon to MICE! Chris can you have someone get this trained up to Amazon mice Sent from Mobile Device On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 5:09 PM -0500, "Jason Hanke" <jayhanke(a)NEUTRALPATH.NET<mailto:jayhanke@NEUTRALPATH.NET>> wrote: Name: Amazon Ports: Main Switch xe-2/0/18, xe-2/0/19 [LAG12] ASN: 16509 IPv4: 206.108.255.111/24<http://206.108.255.111/24> IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:407d::1/64 Amazon will be doing Bilateral peering ONLY. No route-server configuration. Welcome Aboard! -- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net<mailto:jayhanke@neutralpath.net> www.neutralpath.net<http://www.neutralpath.net> ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 ________________________________ ***This message and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, disclosure, copying, use or distribution of the information included in this message is prohibited -- Please immediately and permanently delete.*** ________________________________ ***This message and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, disclosure, copying, use or distribution of the information included in this message is prohibited -- Please immediately and permanently delete.***

Oct. 21, 2016

Re: Please welcome Amazon to MICE!

by Ben Wiechman

Nice. It is indeed. Ben Wiechman Network Engineer IV | Arvig Direct: 320.256.0184 Cell: 320.247.3224 Office: 320.256.7471 ben.wiechman(a)arvig.com On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:22 AM, DeLong, Owen <owen(a)akamai.com> wrote: > Talk about #firstworldproblems. > > > On Oct 20, 2016, at 5:25 PM, Ben Wiechman <ben.wiechman(a)ARVIG.COM > <ben.wiechman(a)arvig.com>> wrote: > > Having a hard time keeping up with all the bilateral peering lately. lol > > > Ben Wiechman > Network Engineer IV | Arvig > Direct: 320.256.0184 > Cell: 320.247.3224 > Office: 320.256.7471 > ben.wiechman(a)arvig.com > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Mike Horwath <drechsau(a)geeks.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 05:08:59PM -0500, Jason Hanke wrote: >> > Name: Amazon >> >> This is very neat. >> >> -- >> Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG <drechsau(a)geeks.org> >> > > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.iphouse.net_cgi-2…> > > > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 >

Oct. 21, 2016

Re: Email for Peering with Amazon

by Levi Pederson

All, Thank you all for the replies. I'll send the requests. Thank you, *Levi Pederson* Mankato Networks LLC cell | 612.481.0769 work | 612.787.7392 levipederson(a)mankatonetworks.net On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 9:27 AM, Justin Krejci <JKrejci(a)usinternet.com> wrote: > I recently setup peering with Amazon in Chicago and successfully used > peering(a)amazon.com to procure a bilateral with them. > > It took about 45 days for them to complete their peering setup due to, as > they informed me, work load and high volume of peering requests they > receive. My point being, don't be surprised if it takes them a while to get > this new peering point going quickly. > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* MICE Discuss [MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] on behalf of Levi > Pederson [levipederson(a)MANKATONETWORKS.NET] > *Sent:* Friday, October 21, 2016 9:23 AM > *To:* MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > *Subject:* [MICE-DISCUSS] Email for Peering with Amazon > > All, > > Who is the primary contact to setup peering with Amazon. > > Thank you, > > *Levi Pederson* > Mankato Networks LLC > cell | 612.481.0769 > work | 612.787.7392 > levipederson(a)mankatonetworks.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 >

Oct. 21, 2016

Re: Email for Peering with Amazon

by Doug McIntyre

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 02:27:53PM +0000, Justin Krejci wrote: > I recently setup peering with Amazon in Chicago and successfully used peering(a)amazon.com to procure a bilateral with them. > > It took about 45 days for them to complete their peering setup due to, as they informed me, work load and high volume of peering requests they receive. My point being, don't be surprised if it takes them a while to get this new peering point going quickly. And of course, letting them have time to actually get connected and running to MICE first, this is only the allocation announcement.. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Oct. 21, 2016

Re: Email for Peering with Amazon

by Justin Krejci

I recently setup peering with Amazon in Chicago and successfully used peering(a)amazon.com to procure a bilateral with them. It took about 45 days for them to complete their peering setup due to, as they informed me, work load and high volume of peering requests they receive. My point being, don't be surprised if it takes them a while to get this new peering point going quickly. ________________________________ From: MICE Discuss [MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] on behalf of Levi Pederson [levipederson(a)MANKATONETWORKS.NET] Sent: Friday, October 21, 2016 9:23 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Email for Peering with Amazon All, Who is the primary contact to setup peering with Amazon. Thank you, Levi Pederson Mankato Networks LLC cell | 612.481.0769 work | 612.787.7392 levipederson(a)mankatonetworks.net<mailto:levipederson@mankatonetworks.net> [http://www.mankatonetworks.com/images/mn_logo_email.png] ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 21, 2016

Email for Peering with Amazon

by Levi Pederson

All, Who is the primary contact to setup peering with Amazon. Thank you, *Levi Pederson* Mankato Networks LLC cell | 612.481.0769 work | 612.787.7392 levipederson(a)mankatonetworks.net

Oct. 21, 2016

Re: Please welcome Amazon to MICE!

by DeLong, Owen

Talk about #firstworldproblems. On Oct 20, 2016, at 5:25 PM, Ben Wiechman <ben.wiechman(a)ARVIG.COM<mailto:ben.wiechman@arvig.com>> wrote: Having a hard time keeping up with all the bilateral peering lately. lol Ben Wiechman Network Engineer IV | Arvig Direct: 320.256.0184 Cell: 320.247.3224 Office: 320.256.7471 ben.wiechman(a)arvig.com<mailto:ben.wiechman@arvig.com> On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Mike Horwath <drechsau(a)geeks.org<mailto:drechsau@geeks.org>> wrote: On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 05:08:59PM -0500, Jason Hanke wrote: > Name: Amazon This is very neat. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG<mailto:drechsau@geeks.org> ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.iphouse.net_cgi-2…>

Oct. 21, 2016

Re: Please welcome Amazon to MICE!

by Richard Laager

On 10/20/2016 05:08 PM, Jason Hanke wrote: > Name: Amazon > Ports: Main Switch xe-2/0/18, xe-2/0/19 [LAG12] > ASN: 16509 > IPv4: 206.108.255.111/24 <http://206.108.255.111/24> > IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:407d::1/64 > > Amazon will be doing Bilateral peering ONLY. No route-server configuration. I added them the participants list, assuming peering(a)amazon.com and no BFD. -- Richard

Oct. 21, 2016

Re: Please welcome Amazon to MICE!

by Ben Wiechman

Having a hard time keeping up with all the bilateral peering lately. lol Ben Wiechman Network Engineer IV | Arvig Direct: 320.256.0184 Cell: 320.247.3224 Office: 320.256.7471 ben.wiechman(a)arvig.com On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 5:21 PM, Mike Horwath <drechsau(a)geeks.org> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 05:08:59PM -0500, Jason Hanke wrote: > > Name: Amazon > > This is very neat. > > -- > Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG >

Oct. 20, 2016

Re: Please welcome Amazon to MICE!

by Mike Horwath

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 05:08:59PM -0500, Jason Hanke wrote: > Name: Amazon This is very neat. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Oct. 20, 2016

Re: Please welcome Amazon to MICE!

by Gary Glissendorf

Chris can you have someone get this trained up to Amazon mice Sent from Mobile Device On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 5:09 PM -0500, "Jason Hanke" <jayhanke(a)NEUTRALPATH.NET<mailto:jayhanke@NEUTRALPATH.NET>> wrote: Name: Amazon Ports: Main Switch xe-2/0/18, xe-2/0/19 [LAG12] ASN: 16509 IPv4: 206.108.255.111/24<http://206.108.255.111/24> IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:407d::1/64 Amazon will be doing Bilateral peering ONLY. No route-server configuration. Welcome Aboard! -- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net<mailto:jayhanke@neutralpath.net> www.neutralpath.net<http://www.neutralpath.net> ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 ________________________________ ***This message and any attachments are solely for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, disclosure, copying, use or distribution of the information included in this message is prohibited -- Please immediately and permanently delete.***

Oct. 20, 2016

Please welcome Amazon to MICE!

by Jason Hanke

Name: Amazon Ports: Main Switch xe-2/0/18, xe-2/0/19 [LAG12] ASN: 16509 IPv4: 206.108.255.111/24 IPv6: 2001:504:27:0:0:407d::1/64 Amazon will be doing Bilateral peering ONLY. No route-server configuration. Welcome Aboard! -- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke(a)neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net

Oct. 20, 2016

Re: SIX Lowers Fees

by Mike Horwath

On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 04:32:05PM +0000, Justin Krejci wrote: > This can has been kicked down the road so many times, it's not even > recognizable as a can anymore. :) That's a great analogy. I can't wait until I can drop some money in. -- Mike Horwath, reachable via drechsau(a)Geeks.ORG

Oct. 18, 2016

Re: SIX Lowers Fees

by Shaun Carlson

Thanks for all of your work getting this wrapped up Richard! s Shaun Carlson Director of Information Technology | Arvig ph: (218) 346.8673 | em: shaun.carlson(a)arvig.com On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:44 AM -0500, "Richard Laager" <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: Non-profit filing will hopefully happen next week, if I get everything done with the MN Secretary of State's office in time. I am currently waiting for them to accept a filing, and then I need to request certified copies of the Articles of Incorporation. Otherwise, I'm out of the country for a couple weeks, so it'll happen when I get back. I have no idea how long the IRS will take or if there is a serious risk of rejection. I definitely think we need to figure some plan for fees. -- Richard

Oct. 18, 2016

Re: SIX Lowers Fees

by Richard Laager

Non-profit filing will hopefully happen next week, if I get everything done with the MN Secretary of State's office in time. I am currently waiting for them to accept a filing, and then I need to request certified copies of the Articles of Incorporation. Otherwise, I'm out of the country for a couple weeks, so it'll happen when I get back. I have no idea how long the IRS will take or if there is a serious risk of rejection. I definitely think we need to figure some plan for fees. -- Richard

Oct. 18, 2016

SIX Lowers Fees

by Justin Krejci

I feel SIX is like a big brother that MICE looks up to so I would like to point out that SIX is lowering their port fees due to their success of membership growth. What a good problem, we're taking in so much money we'd like to drop our fees significantly. https://www.seattleix.net/pr20160930 As the MICE fee structure is still not implemented or even decided yet, I'd like to hit the beehive a little and see if there is any progress to that end. I am sure that MICE as a non non-profit could still take in money and then also spend that money without much challenge to avoid any serious taxation concerns, assuming the non-profit work continues to stall for more months or years (unless someone wants to share good news in this regard). Can the board set a goal or target for us to strive towards as an organization? Maybe we need a little tyranny to get things going in this regard? This can has been kicked down the road so many times, it's not even recognizable as a can anymore. :) Food for thought.

Oct. 18, 2016

MICE In the News

by Charles Monson

I was made aware Yahoo Finance posted a brief article yesterday about MICE. I didn't see it posted to the list yet, but figured a few people may be interested in reading it. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/midwest-internet-cooperative-exchange-mice-13… Charles

Oct. 12, 2016

DocuMNtray

by David Farmer

This is a great DocuMNtray about the Minnesota Tech Industry both historic and where it going in the future. http://www.documntary.com/ We should have a like to this on the MICE page. -- =============================================== 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 ===============================================

Oct. 11, 2016

Minutes

by Richard Laager

Did anyone take minutes at the last user group meeting? If so, can I get a copy of the draft minutes for the website? -- Richard

Oct. 10, 2016

Re: BFD support on BGP sessions

by Andrew Hoyos

> > On Oct 7, 2016, at 5:07 PM, Andrew Hoyos <hoyosa(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> On Oct 7, 2016, at 4:47 PM, Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)IPHOUSE.NET> wrote: >> >> protocol bfd { >> interface "bce1" { >> min rx interval 20 ms; >> min tx interval 50 ms; >> idle tx interval 300 ms; >> passive; >> }; >> neighbor 206.108.255.3; >> neighbor 206.108.255.4; >> neighbor 206.108.255.5; >> neighbor 206.108.255.6; >> neighbor 206.108.255.7; >> neighbor 206.108.255.8; >> .... >> } > > Based on http://bird.network.cz/?get_doc&f=bird-6.html, I’d suggest something a bit less aggressive like 500ms x 3. I know a number of us here are using similar timer settings with good luck. idle tx would seem to not be required since it’s in passive mode (so it won’t send packets to a neighbor until it gets one first) > > protocol bfd { > interface "bce1" { > interval 500 ms; > multiplier 3 > passive; > }; And for the neighbors, you’d want to tie these to the BGP sessions rather than creating direct sessions inside 'protocol bfd'. If you add the ‘bfd’ switch to BGP sessions, it will dynamically create the BFD sessions, and tie BGP state to BFD. -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com

Oct. 7, 2016

Re: BFD support on BGP sessions

by Andrew Hoyos

> On Oct 7, 2016, at 4:47 PM, Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)IPHOUSE.NET> wrote: > > protocol bfd { > interface "bce1" { > min rx interval 20 ms; > min tx interval 50 ms; > idle tx interval 300 ms; > passive; > }; > neighbor 206.108.255.3; > neighbor 206.108.255.4; > neighbor 206.108.255.5; > neighbor 206.108.255.6; > neighbor 206.108.255.7; > neighbor 206.108.255.8; > .... > } Based on http://bird.network.cz/?get_doc&f=bird-6.html, I’d suggest something a bit less aggressive like 500ms x 3. I know a number of us here are using similar timer settings with good luck. idle tx would seem to not be required since it’s in passive mode (so it won’t send packets to a neighbor until it gets one first) protocol bfd { interface "bce1" { interval 500 ms; multiplier 3 passive; }; -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com

Oct. 7, 2016

Re: BFD support on BGP sessions

by Doug McIntyre

On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 04:30:22PM -0500, James Stahr wrote: > For MICE though, it would be *great* if one of the route servers could be > setup with BFD support that way everyone could benefit and withdraw routes > faster once it was rolled out to both. It still wouldn't insure that A can > talk directly to B, only bilateral peering can solve that. BIRD appears to > have a "passive" setting for it too, so it wouldn't try to do BFD unless the > other side initiated. So, something like this? protocol bfd { interface "bce1" { min rx interval 20 ms; min tx interval 50 ms; idle tx interval 300 ms; passive; }; neighbor 206.108.255.3; neighbor 206.108.255.4; neighbor 206.108.255.5; neighbor 206.108.255.6; neighbor 206.108.255.7; neighbor 206.108.255.8; .... } And then likewise for the IPv6 daemon? -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn(a)iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades

Oct. 7, 2016

Re: BFD support on BGP sessions

by James Stahr

On 10/04/2016 8:35 PM, Michael Hare wrote: > Call it a Madison thing; AS 3128 would also like to BFD peer with interested parties. I like Andrew's "Y/N" column idea. > > -Michael > +1 on all counts.. For any of the folks also at MadIX, I'll do BFD with you there as well. Can we add BFD as a column on its' KB as well? For MICE though, it would be *great* if one of the route servers could be setup with BFD support that way everyone could benefit and withdraw routes faster once it was rolled out to both. It still wouldn't insure that A can talk directly to B, only bilateral peering can solve that. BIRD appears to have a "passive" setting for it too, so it wouldn't try to do BFD unless the other side initiated. -James > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Colin Baker > Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 4:21 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] BFD support on BGP sessions > > On 04.10.2016 16:09, Andrew Hoyos wrote: > >> +1 to this. We (AS53597) will happy enable BFD to anyone that >> supports. Shoot us an email at noc(a)hoyosconsulting.com. >> >> Perhaps we can add a column to the participants page for a Y/N flag >> there? >> >> > Meee tooo > > Email peering(a)supranet.net (AS4150) and we'll be happy to get this > added. > >

Oct. 7, 2016

Re: EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G Participants

by Jeremy Lumby

As of 7:30AM, we are back to how we were yesterday afternoon. If you want to see the exact times I made the switch, both ports are graphed individually on http://micelg.usinternet.com/ on the last page of the copper switch graphs. I am not showing any loss to my USI customer since I made the switch back this morning (however I was prior to 7:30AM). From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of Matthew Beckwell Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2016 9:38 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G Participants Just to confirm...what port(s) are active right now for the new LAG at the moment? I'm currently getting >1% loss from the "new" 4200 (ge-0/0/15) over to USI on the 4500 (xe-0/0/14). I thought I ran the same test yesterday afternoon with no loss.. ~Matthew On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:40 AM, Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com> wrote: For the time being, I am going to leave only the connection from the 4200 to the 4500 active since it has the most members, and therefore will show the least overall loss, while we determine our next step in troubleshooting this issue. To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Oct. 5, 2016

Re: EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G Participants

by Matthew Beckwell

Just to confirm...what port(s) are active right now for the new LAG at the moment? I'm currently getting >1% loss from the "new" 4200 (ge-0/0/15) over to USI on the 4500 (xe-0/0/14). I thought I ran the same test yesterday afternoon with no loss.. ~Matthew On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 7:40 AM, Jeremy Lumby <jlumby(a)mnvoip.com> wrote: > For the time being, I am going to leave only the connection from the 4200 > to the 4500 active since it has the most members, and therefore will show > the least overall loss, while we determine our next step in troubleshooting > this issue. >

Oct. 5, 2016

Re: BFD support on BGP sessions

by Richard Laager

On 10/05/2016 07:17 AM, Colin Baker wrote: > Would have to be per session to be useful. I'm not aware of any IXPs > doing BFD on route servers - it's something worth discussing, and it may > be fine with fairly conservative timers, but I suspect members > interested in utilizing BFD will probably also want to set up bilateral > with those peers. I'm wondering if routers support configuring a BFD neighbor separately from a BGP neighbor and then using BFD for next-hop validation. I'm guessing not. So for those of you looking at using BFD, in addition to the bilateral peering, you'd need to filter the routes coming from the route servers and drop those of your BFD peers, right? Otherwise, when your session to the peer goes down, you'd still be hearing their routes from the route server. >> Colin, does Supranet support BFD for both AS4150 and AS5683, or just the >> former? > > 4150. You can actually remove 5683 from the website - it's not > currently connected and we likely won't be bringing it back. I've updated the website. The route servers will need to be updated too, and this frees up 206.108.255.28. -- Richard

Oct. 5, 2016

Re: EX4200 (1G Switch) Packet Loss -> 10G Participants

by Jeremy Lumby

Just to update everyone after yesterday's maintenance. After removing the 4200 from the virtual chassis, unfortunately I am still seeing loss when packets go between the 4500, and the 4550. The good news is removing the 4200 has improved it since the loss is now down to 0.06% on a 6 hour test (previously it was around 0.3%), unfortunately I am 100% sure it is real since I can shut down 1 of the two LAG ports at a time from the 4200, and the loss to the switch with the active lag port is always truly 0, and the other switch is 0.06% When I flip which port on the LAG is shutdown, then the loss flips to the other switch exactly as expected. For the time being, I am going to leave only the connection from the 4200 to the 4500 active since it has the most members, and therefore will show the least overall loss, while we determine our next step in troubleshooting this issue. 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

Oct. 5, 2016

Re: BFD support on BGP sessions

by Colin Baker

On 04.10.2016 20:52, Richard Laager wrote: > Is it implied that BFD is always for bi-lateral sessions only? Or do > some routers allow configuring BFD separately from BGP in some useful > way? (I don't think mine do.) Would have to be per session to be useful. I'm not aware of any IXPs doing BFD on route servers - it's something worth discussing, and it may be fine with fairly conservative timers, but I suspect members interested in utilizing BFD will probably also want to set up bilateral with those peers. > Colin, does Supranet support BFD for both AS4150 and AS5683, or just > the > former? 4150. You can actually remove 5683 from the website - it's not currently connected and we likely won't be bringing it back. -- Colin Baker SupraNet Communications, Inc. (608) 572-7634 colinb(a)supranet.net This message is subject to the SupraNet Email Confidentiality Policy which is located at http://supranet.net/confidentiality

Oct. 5, 2016