US internet ookla server has always given us good results. On Sun, Feb 24, 2019, 4:36 PM Richard Laager <rlaager@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

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

Politicians aren’t Internet savvy. So it ends up in the wrong place. *sigh* Dean From: MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Jay Hanke Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2019 5:34 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS@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@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@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

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@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@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> <MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *Jay Hanke *Sent:* Sunday, February 24, 2019 5:34 PM *To:* MICE-DISCUSS@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@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@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@southfront.io Phone 612-204-0000

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@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@parkregion.com> wrote:

Have you looked into using a raspberry PI device?

*From:* MICE Discuss <MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *Steve Howard *Sent:* Monday, February 25, 2019 9:20 AM *To:* MICE-DISCUSS@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@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> <MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> *On Behalf Of *Jay Hanke *Sent:* Sunday, February 24, 2019 11:13 AM *To:* 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@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

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@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@wiscnet.net 608-210-3965

-- Reid Fishler Director Hurricane Electric +1-510-580-4178

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@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Lubitz, Jake (MNIT) Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 10:05 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS@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@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Chris Wopat Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 9:50 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS@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.c... -- Chris Wopat Network Engineer, WiscNet wopat@wiscnet.net 608-210-3965

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@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@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@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Lubitz, Jake (MNIT) Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 10:05 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS@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@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET> On Behalf Of Chris Wopat Sent: Monday, February 25, 2019 9:50 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS@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.c...

-- Chris Wopat Network Engineer, WiscNet wopat@wiscnet.net 608-210-3965

-- Jay Hanke, President South Front Networks 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

-- steve ulrich (sulrich@botwerks.*)

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@Geeks.ORG