- mice-discuss - lists.micemn.net

Re: Old/Stale Infrastructure information - IXP Dashboard / AcenTek

by Richard Laager

On 4/26/21 2:06 PM, Dean Bahls wrote: > Acentek is PO5 on our remote, comprised of Eth 1/6 and 1/7 (if you care) Okay, but then where is CNS (AS32609, which is currently listed as 1/6 on the website)? -- Richard

April 26, 2021

Re: Old/Stale Infrastructure information - IXP Dashboard / AcenTek

by Jesse Reed

Thanks everyone; much appreciated! Jesse -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay Hanke Sent: Monday, April 26, 2021 2:39 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Old/Stale Infrastructure information - IXP Dashboard / AcenTek EXTERNAL: This email originated from a sender outside AcenTek. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. No problem. I moved the port into their LAG in the portal. Graphs in the portal should update in 24 hours. On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 2:06 PM Dean Bahls <dean.bahls(a)cooperative-networks.com> wrote: > > Dang, I thought we sent a note about that not too long ago. Acentek > is PO5 on our remote, comprised of Eth 1/6 and 1/7 (if you care) > > Thanks! > > Dean > > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay > Hanke > Sent: Monday, April 26, 2021 2:04 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Old/Stale Infrastructure information - IXP > Dashboard / AcenTek > > I don't think we got the notice from the remote switch operator. > > Steve/Dean do you have the new port info for Acentek? > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 2:00 PM Jesse Reed <jreed(a)acentek.net> wrote: > > > > To whom it may concern: > > > > Earlier this year, AcenTek worked w/someone to turn up a 2nd link inside a 20 Gig port-ch @ the 511 building facing our equipment. Logging into the IXP portal today, we see that our information is still only reflective of 1 single 10 Gig link. Can this information be updated accordingly inside the AcenTek portal? > > > > Thanks ahead of time, > > > > Jesse Reed > > > > -- > Jay Hanke, President > South Front Networks > jayhanke(a)southfront.io > Phone 612-204-0000 -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

April 26, 2021

Re: Old/Stale Infrastructure information - IXP Dashboard / AcenTek

by Jay Hanke

No problem. I moved the port into their LAG in the portal. Graphs in the portal should update in 24 hours. On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 2:06 PM Dean Bahls <dean.bahls(a)cooperative-networks.com> wrote: > > Dang, I thought we sent a note about that not too long ago. Acentek is PO5 on our remote, comprised of Eth 1/6 and 1/7 (if you care) > > Thanks! > > Dean > > > -----Original Message----- > From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay Hanke > Sent: Monday, April 26, 2021 2:04 PM > To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET > Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Old/Stale Infrastructure information - IXP Dashboard / AcenTek > > I don't think we got the notice from the remote switch operator. > > Steve/Dean do you have the new port info for Acentek? > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 2:00 PM Jesse Reed <jreed(a)acentek.net> wrote: > > > > To whom it may concern: > > > > Earlier this year, AcenTek worked w/someone to turn up a 2nd link inside a 20 Gig port-ch @ the 511 building facing our equipment. Logging into the IXP portal today, we see that our information is still only reflective of 1 single 10 Gig link. Can this information be updated accordingly inside the AcenTek portal? > > > > Thanks ahead of time, > > > > Jesse Reed > > > > -- > Jay Hanke, President > South Front Networks > jayhanke(a)southfront.io > Phone 612-204-0000 -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

April 26, 2021

Re: Old/Stale Infrastructure information - IXP Dashboard / AcenTek

by Dean Bahls

Dang, I thought we sent a note about that not too long ago. Acentek is PO5 on our remote, comprised of Eth 1/6 and 1/7 (if you care) Thanks! Dean -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay Hanke Sent: Monday, April 26, 2021 2:04 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Old/Stale Infrastructure information - IXP Dashboard / AcenTek I don't think we got the notice from the remote switch operator. Steve/Dean do you have the new port info for Acentek? On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 2:00 PM Jesse Reed <jreed(a)acentek.net> wrote: > > To whom it may concern: > > Earlier this year, AcenTek worked w/someone to turn up a 2nd link inside a 20 Gig port-ch @ the 511 building facing our equipment. Logging into the IXP portal today, we see that our information is still only reflective of 1 single 10 Gig link. Can this information be updated accordingly inside the AcenTek portal? > > Thanks ahead of time, > > Jesse Reed -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

April 26, 2021

Re: Old/Stale Infrastructure information - IXP Dashboard / AcenTek

by Jay Hanke

I don't think we got the notice from the remote switch operator. Steve/Dean do you have the new port info for Acentek? On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 2:00 PM Jesse Reed <jreed(a)acentek.net> wrote: > > To whom it may concern: > > Earlier this year, AcenTek worked w/someone to turn up a 2nd link inside a 20 Gig port-ch @ the 511 building facing our equipment. Logging into the IXP portal today, we see that our information is still only reflective of 1 single 10 Gig link. Can this information be updated accordingly inside the AcenTek portal? > > Thanks ahead of time, > > Jesse Reed -- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks jayhanke(a)southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

April 26, 2021

Old/Stale Infrastructure information - IXP Dashboard / AcenTek

by Jesse Reed

To whom it may concern: Earlier this year, AcenTek worked w/someone to turn up a 2nd link inside a 20 Gig port-ch @ the 511 building facing our equipment. Logging into the IXP portal today, we see that our information is still only reflective of 1 single 10 Gig link. Can this information be updated accordingly inside the AcenTek portal? Thanks ahead of time, Jesse Reed

April 26, 2021

Re: Zayo Belle Plaine - April 15th

by Ben Wiechman

IOS-XR bottoms out at 15ms. IOS/XE has typically been 150ms. Agreed that in general unless you have <50ms failover requirements 150ms+ is probably a good compromise. Ben Wiechman Director of IP Strategy and Engineering Direct: 320.256.0184 Cell: 320.247.3224 ben.wiechman(a)arvig.com 150 Second Street SW | Perham, MN 56573 | arvig.com On Wed, Apr 21, 2021, 17:57 Andrew Hoyos <hoyosa(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Apr 21, 2021, at 5:52 PM, David Farmer < > 0000000e7948cb21-dmarc-request(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> wrote: > > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 5:36 PM Richard Laager <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: > >> On 4/21/21 3:04 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: >> > And to follow up on my previous question, is Arista falling bit short in >> >> > our situation, by not supporting a receive interval of 10 msec? >> >> I've had a couple vendors suggest not to make it that short. Brocade, >> for example, suggested 150 ms as a minimum. Arista was more vague, but >> from your error message, apparently their implementation doesn't even >> try to do less than 50 ms. >> > > Maybe think about this from another perspective, 10 ms is 100 times a > second, 50 ms is 20 times a second, and 150 ms just over 6 times a second. > I think 10 ms is probably being a little impatient. > > > Not the mention, the added CPU load on both ends dealing with said BFD > packets 100x/sec. > > We’ve generally seen 50-250ms used in practice. 10ms does seem super > aggressive. We use 250ms x 3 here for backbone links and peers/transit that > support BFD, and 750ms x 3 facing internal gear. > > > — > Andrew Hoyos > hoyosa(a)gmail.com > > > > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: > http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 >

April 22, 2021

Re: Zayo Belle Plaine - April 15th

by Andrew Hoyos

On Apr 21, 2021, at 5:52 PM, David Farmer <0000000e7948cb21-dmarc-request(a)LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 5:36 PM Richard Laager <rlaager(a)wiktel.com <mailto:rlaager@wiktel.com>> wrote: > On 4/21/21 3:04 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: > > And to follow up on my previous question, is Arista falling bit short in > > our situation, by not supporting a receive interval of 10 msec? > > I've had a couple vendors suggest not to make it that short. Brocade, > for example, suggested 150 ms as a minimum. Arista was more vague, but > from your error message, apparently their implementation doesn't even > try to do less than 50 ms. > > Maybe think about this from another perspective, 10 ms is 100 times a second, 50 ms is 20 times a second, and 150 ms just over 6 times a second. I think 10 ms is probably being a little impatient. Not the mention, the added CPU load on both ends dealing with said BFD packets 100x/sec. We’ve generally seen 50-250ms used in practice. 10ms does seem super aggressive. We use 250ms x 3 here for backbone links and peers/transit that support BFD, and 750ms x 3 facing internal gear. — Andrew Hoyos hoyosa(a)gmail.com <mailto:hoyosa@gmail.com>

April 21, 2021

Re: Zayo Belle Plaine - April 15th

by David Farmer

On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 5:36 PM Richard Laager <rlaager(a)wiktel.com> wrote: > On 4/21/21 3:04 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: > > And to follow up on my previous question, is Arista falling bit short in > > our situation, by not supporting a receive interval of 10 msec? > > I've had a couple vendors suggest not to make it that short. Brocade, > for example, suggested 150 ms as a minimum. Arista was more vague, but > from your error message, apparently their implementation doesn't even > try to do less than 50 ms. > Maybe think about this from another perspective, 10 ms is 100 times a second, 50 ms is 20 times a second, and 150 ms just over 6 times a second. I think 10 ms is probably being a little impatient. Thanks. -- =============================================== 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 ===============================================

April 21, 2021

Re: Zayo Belle Plaine - April 15th

by Richard Laager

On 4/21/21 3:04 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: > And to follow up on my previous question, is Arista falling bit short in > our situation, by not supporting a receive interval of 10 msec? I've had a couple vendors suggest not to make it that short. Brocade, for example, suggested 150 ms as a minimum. Arista was more vague, but from your error message, apparently their implementation doesn't even try to do less than 50 ms. -- Richard

April 21, 2021