Please welcome Fastly to MICE!
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@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@neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net
Awesome! Welcome Fastly! TL;DR: Things are good and happy. The people doing the work are doing a good job. I have some ideas/comments on ways we could improve. As I was reading this e-mail I did some quick checking on the newly joining organization, as I do with all of the new member joining announcements. It is nice to see another CDN joining in this case. I then like to see how many prefix counts they may be contributing to the exchange so I typically check them out in peeringdb.com. This got me thinking that it may be a good idea to have a requirement that joining networks have and maintain their peeringdb.com record. I am guessing many others find it useful like I do to have an approximate prefix count expected. I know some people like to keep their max-prefix limits set near to the expected prefix count when on the route servers. A joining company's prefix count could also be requested up front, especially if they do intend to peer to the route servers, which then could be included in the new member announcement e-mail. This way people can adjust their max prefix settings accordingly in advance. This is especially useful in the case of a larger prefix count network before they unload onto the exchange, like HE has recently done. (thumbs up on that)
From my perspective, it's been consistent and smooth on the turn ups of new networks on the exchange so I am not criticizing at all but similar to a line of discussion on a different thread, it may not be a bad idea to have a documented template/process for all of the things needed in the turn up of a new network. Plus I like the idea of sharing our collectively learned knowledge in building up the exchange with the general internet for others to potentially benefit from or even possibly for others to offer suggestions to us to help us improve our exchange.
For example, I notice we don't have an official position (at least not a documented official position which arguably means we don't have a position) on PTR records for the member IP addresses. I realize PTRs are not significantly important but they can be useful when troubleshooting and having them I feel gives a little extra polish to the exchange in general. To reiterate/elaborate, I think that Jay, Doug, Richard, Anthony, etc. have been doing an excellent job with getting new organizations up and running and getting the requisite website/cacti components updated to reflect the changes. ________________________________________ From: MICE Discuss [MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] on behalf of Jason Hanke [jayhanke@NEUTRALPATH.NET] Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 9:20 AM To: MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Please welcome Fastly to MICE! 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@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@neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 04:35:59PM +0000, Justin Krejci wrote:
For example, I notice we don't have an official position (at least not a documented official position which arguably means we don't have a position) on PTR records for the member IP addresses. I realize PTRs are not significantly important but they can be useful when troubleshooting and having them I feel gives a little extra polish to the exchange in general. ...
Documentation and policy writing sucks loads and loads of time out of people, just as an experience point. It is difficult to get anybody to do that sort of thing in general. I've switched on the PTR updates from batches to doing it more on demand on turn up notices from Jay now. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn@iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades
The exchange only cares about the max prefix value if it's larger than our default route server limit of 1000. That's a big network, and I think we've only hit that once. I'm not sure we need to bother getting an explicit number from every network on turn-up. On the PeeringDB thing... I've thought about that before too. Is *requiring* an entry going too far? I'm on the fence about that. I see that SIX links the AS number in the participants list to PeeringDB rather than bgp.he.net. I like the bgp.he.net links, but I should see if I can find some place on the list to put a PeeringDB link. -- Richard
There is also a peeringDB API. It might be time for a database driven documentation. Then we could export/import to dns or switch configs. An online request form might be a good start. On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Richard Laager <rlaager@wiktel.com> wrote:
The exchange only cares about the max prefix value if it's larger than our default route server limit of 1000. That's a big network, and I think we've only hit that once. I'm not sure we need to bother getting an explicit number from every network on turn-up.
On the PeeringDB thing... I've thought about that before too. Is *requiring* an entry going too far? I'm on the fence about that.
I see that SIX links the AS number in the participants list to PeeringDB rather than bgp.he.net. I like the bgp.he.net links, but I should see if I can find some place on the list to put a PeeringDB link.
-- Richard
-- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke@neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net
The folks on NWAX are using IXPManager (https://github.com/inex/IXP-Manager), as well as others. AFAIK, this automates lots of this process (DNS, route-servers, etc) and pulls things from PeeringDB. Might be worth a look. -- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa@gmail.com
On Oct 25, 2016, at 2:00 PM, Jason Hanke <jayhanke@NEUTRALPATH.NET> wrote:
There is also a peeringDB API.
It might be time for a database driven documentation. Then we could export/import to dns or switch configs.
An online request form might be a good start.
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Richard Laager <rlaager@wiktel.com> wrote:
The exchange only cares about the max prefix value if it's larger than our default route server limit of 1000. That's a big network, and I think we've only hit that once. I'm not sure we need to bother getting an explicit number from every network on turn-up.
On the PeeringDB thing... I've thought about that before too. Is *requiring* an entry going too far? I'm on the fence about that.
I see that SIX links the AS number in the participants list to PeeringDB rather than bgp.he.net. I like the bgp.he.net links, but I should see if I can find some place on the list to put a PeeringDB link.
-- Richard
-- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke@neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net
Andrew, We have an IXP Manager (they just simplified their install a great deal) setup running now for just the metrics. Except for bursty MAX bits feeds it's pretty good (Real max of 25, system shows full burst max at 28 still working on why it's less consistent than our cacti). I am going to attempt a roll out of the Route Servers config additions in the next couple of weekends. Thank you, *Levi Pederson* Mankato Networks LLC cell | 612.481.0769 work | 612.787.7392 levipederson@mankatonetworks.net On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Andrew Hoyos <hoyosa@gmail.com> wrote:
The folks on NWAX are using IXPManager (https://github.com/inex/IXP- Manager), as well as others. AFAIK, this automates lots of this process (DNS, route-servers, etc) and pulls things from PeeringDB. Might be worth a look.
-- Andrew Hoyos hoyosa@gmail.com
On Oct 25, 2016, at 2:00 PM, Jason Hanke <jayhanke@NEUTRALPATH.NET> wrote:
There is also a peeringDB API.
It might be time for a database driven documentation. Then we could export/import to dns or switch configs.
An online request form might be a good start.
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Richard Laager <rlaager@wiktel.com> wrote:
The exchange only cares about the max prefix value if it's larger than our default route server limit of 1000. That's a big network, and I think we've only hit that once. I'm not sure we need to bother getting an explicit number from every network on turn-up.
On the PeeringDB thing... I've thought about that before too. Is *requiring* an entry going too far? I'm on the fence about that.
I see that SIX links the AS number in the participants list to PeeringDB rather than bgp.he.net. I like the bgp.he.net links, but I should see if I can find some place on the list to put a PeeringDB link.
-- Richard
-- Jay Hanke CTO Neutral Path Communications 3 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 204 Mankato, MN 56001 (507) 327-2398 mobile jayhanke@neutralpath.net www.neutralpath.net
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 09:20:52AM -0500, Jason Hanke wrote:
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@fastly.com
Route Server and website please, I'm checking on BFD support.
Sure, I've got the route servers, switch description and reverse PTRs all set for both these and the Unggoy Broadband entry (once the port assignment is cleared up). Welcome! -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn@iphouse.net> ~.~ ipHouse ~.~ Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades
participants (6)
-
Andrew Hoyos -
Doug McIntyre -
Jason Hanke -
Justin Krejci -
Levi Pederson -
Richard Laager