Agenda Items - Last Call
All, Please send any additional agenda (business, technical or discussion) items you may have. I plan to have the Agenda out this afternoon for Thursday's meeting. Also, one more quick reminder. If you haven't responded yet, please let me know your AS and number of people attending. Thanks! s *Shaun Carlson*Network Engineering Manager | Arvig ph: (218) 346-8673 | em: shaun.carlson@arvig.com ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: ?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1
AS10242 - zero attending Agenda item I recommend - application of the variously discussed MICE switch security policy configurations for storm controls, mac learning limits, L2 bpdu handling, etc. ________________________________ From: MICE Discuss [MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] on behalf of Shaun Carlson [shaun.carlson@ARVIG.COM] Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 8:43 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Agenda Items - Last Call All, Please send any additional agenda (business, technical or discussion) items you may have. I plan to have the Agenda out this afternoon for Thursday's meeting. Also, one more quick reminder. If you haven't responded yet, please let me know your AS and number of people attending. Thanks! s Shaun Carlson Network Engineering Manager | Arvig ph: (218) 346-8673 | em: shaun.carlson@arvig.com<mailto:shaun.carlson@arvig.com> ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: ?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1<UrlBlockedError.aspx> ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: ?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1
On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 08:43 -0500, Shaun Carlson wrote:
Please send any additional agenda (business, technical or discussion) items you may have. I plan to have the Agenda out this afternoon for Thursday's meeting.
I'm not attending*, but maybe others should discuss the IPv6 numbering plan? Specifically: should we be putting the ASN bytes at the end of the IPv6 address for multicast group reasons? * At least not in person. Was there going to be any sort of remote option? -- Richard ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: ?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1
I think there is a web based option...Also, you wont be there?! What is a MICE meeting without you? :-P Reid On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:10 PM, Richard Laager <rlaager@wiktel.com> wrote:
On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 08:43 -0500, Shaun Carlson wrote:
Please send any additional agenda (business, technical or discussion) items you may have. I plan to have the Agenda out this afternoon for Thursday's meeting.
I'm not attending*, but maybe others should discuss the IPv6 numbering plan? Specifically: should we be putting the ASN bytes at the end of the IPv6 address for multicast group reasons?
* At least not in person. Was there going to be any sort of remote option?
-- Richard
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: ?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1
-- Reid Fishler Director Hurricane Electric +1-510-580-4178 ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: ?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 03:10:21PM -0500, Richard Laager wrote:
I'm not attending*, but maybe others should discuss the IPv6 numbering plan? Specifically: should we be putting the ASN bytes at the end of the IPv6 address for multicast group reasons?
From what I've read on it, the purpose of the multicast group mainly is to break up the ND announcements into separate smaller groups, since ARP broadcasts on truely huge networks can get to be quite large and
I'm sorry, but I'm trying to understand the "problem". (I'm not the one who originally suggested the layout, but did initially redeploy the IPv6 addressing from the borrowed addressing. First off, we are talking about a total of 26 IPv6 end-points. Maybe if MICE grows a lot, we'll double that? Up to 52 end-points? problematic when you have 10,000 hosts responding. As far as I can tell, the purpose of the multicast group grouping the lowest 24bits is not to put each endpoint into its own multicast group, but only to break it up into smaller and more manageable traffic bursts in order to avoid the multi-megabit ARP storms that can happen on truely huge networks. Either way, we are talking about a potential of 26 hosts reponding to ND requests. The only problem I see is that somebody following a CoPP guide that put the ND policing limit at too low of a limit is saying that he is getting more ND traffic than his CoPP guide suggests. Am I totally confused about this? -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn@iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: ?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1
participants (5)
-
Doug McIntyre -
Justin Krejci -
Reid Fishler -
Richard Laager -
Shaun Carlson