Hello,
CNS has received a request from one of its customers for a direct
connection to MICE.
If the consensus is to move forward, we could haul the MICE VLAN to
that customer (and presumably to any other CNS member or customer
who wants a direct MICE connection). This could result in the MICE
VLAN appearing at various places throughout the region.
I think that this could be a good thing for MICE, but if not managed
correctly, it has the potential to be troublesome for problem
isolation. MICE already has remote switches at 511. Other
exchanges often have switches connected throughout their city. In
this case, it is a little of both – except that the individual
remote connections could be farther away in different directions.
Does that matter?
Whether we add remote connections or not, I'd like to see us come up
with a plan for spanning tree. It probably would be best to make
sure that our spanning tree root is one of the MICE 10Gig switches
(probably the main one?). Or, alternatively, we could
disable/filter spanning tree altogether and do MAC filtering for
loop prevention. I think that spanning tree has its limitations,
but it is much easier to maintain then MAC filtering. It looks like
the current spanning tree root is 00:0c:db:fe:af:00 which looks like
a Brocade device. Hmmm... We might want to change that...
What does everybody think? Are there better ways to do this?
Thanks,
Steve