FYI: The CNS switch has a default route of 69.147.218.3 (iphouse). Perhaps we need to change that? On 01/09/2012 07:23 PM, Anthony Anderberg wrote:

I can ping it from the main MICE switch but not from the new stats server, traceroutes from there don't complete - Justin can you take a look? Looks like 12/15/2011 at 22:53 was the last successful poll if that helps any.

I'd thought it was just a couple larger players that have been inactive lately, good catch.

Anthony Anderberg Sr. Systems Analyst 320-234-5239 anthonyanderberg@nu-telecom.net www.nutelecom.net

-----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET] On Behalf Of David Farmer Sent: Monday, January 09, 2012 6:56 PM To: MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] Stats Collection for CNS Switch

The stats collection for the CNS Switch seems to be missing since mid December on;

http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti

I think it is effecting the Aggregate MICE Traffic graph on the main web page.

Compare these two detail graphs for the same port on the two different Cacti set ups.

http://stats.micemn.net/cacti/graph.php?action=view&local_graph_id=94&rra_id...

http://micelg.usinternet.com/cacti/graph.php?action=view&local_graph_id=148&...

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 ===============================================

########################################################################

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

Doug, On 01/10/2012 10:25 AM, Doug McIntyre wrote:

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 10:02:00AM -0600, Steve Howard wrote:

...

FYI: The CNS switch has a default route of 69.147.218.3 (iphouse). Perhaps we need to change that? Did something change during the move from "AC to DC" power on 12/20 for the CNS switch? There were no software changes made. Just physically moved the switch and pulled out the AC power supplies and put in DC.

However, prior to power supply change I got an e-mail from Anthony on 12/16 indicating that he could no longer ping the CNS switch. Something must have changed.

There hasn't been any change at ipHouse that would account for any routing change. I can still ping the switch at 69.147.218.253 from ipHouse.

It would be interesting to see what the routing table in the CNS switch looked like. Here is the routing table (after I changed it today):

Gateway of last resort is not set 216.250.190.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets S 216.250.190.133 [1/0] via 69.147.218.3 S 216.240.190.0/24 [1/0] via 69.147.218.3 69.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 69.147.218.0 is directly connected, Vlan847 172.31.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets S 172.31.10.131 [1/0] via 10.248.1.1 S 209.191.199.0/24 [1/0] via 69.147.218.120 S 216.17.46.0/24 [1/0] via 69.147.218.19 10.0.0.0/30 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 10.248.1.0 is directly connected, FastEthernet0

Since this is a L3 switch, you could edit the routing table with just netblocks instead of a default route.

It only has the base feature package. So, the options are limited. But, it looks like it can handle static routes just fine... So I added them.

(ie. really we just need a route for 216.250.190.0/24 out to 69.147.218.3 for your switch to reach the stats.micemn.net machine). Likewise, having a route for the new stats VM at USInternet could be done the same way reachable via their gateway.

What is the IP address for the USInternet stats VM? I tried 216.17.46.18, but I couldn't ping it from the CNS switch. The CNS switch logs don't indicate any snmp queries except for the ones from 216.250.190.133. ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

Yeah, looks like the MICE subnet got whacked out of the routing table. Temporarily I've added a static route on the router the micelg server is using for its gateway and it appears it has fully restore connectivity now as I can ping the cns switch from the server. On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 11:48 -0600, Jay Hanke wrote:

...

...

There hasn't been any change at ipHouse that would account for any routing change. I can still ping the switch at 69.147.218.253 from ipHouse.

Two ideas:

1) Wasn't one of the akamai routing changes done in a about the same time? 2) From the USI perspective, what path are you following towards the MICE subnet?

Jay

########################################################################

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

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 03:21:17PM -0600, Andrew Hoyos wrote:

Just a suggestion: would it make more sense for each of the folks providing space/power for the switches to provide a /29 or /31 for OOB management, rather than inband management within the MICE subnet?

That way, it's kinda separated, and nobody has to worry about static routing stuff different places, or distributing the IX subnet itself.

IX subnet = IX participant routers only then

SUSPENSE IS KILLING ME! :) I'd be happy to provide the switch subnetting requirements for OOB (for switches that have OOB that is). but anyone else can take the helm on that as well. -- Mike Horwath ipHouse - Welcome home! drechsau@iphouse.net The universe is an island, surrounded by whatever it is that surrounds universes. - Berkeley Fortune ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1

On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 03:21:17PM -0600, Andrew Hoyos wrote:

Just a suggestion: would it make more sense for each of the folks providing space/power for the switches to provide a /29 or /31 for OOB management, rather than inband management within the MICE subnet?

FWIW: The juniper switch stack is already that way, we push down a small routable block that 216.250.183.11 is in. -- Doug McIntyre <merlyn@iphouse.net> -- ipHouse/Goldengate/Bitstream/ProNS -- Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1