When I looked at the long term (greater than 10 year) cost of CGNAT on Juniper vs buying more IPV4, buying more IPV4 came out ahead. Your results may vary.
On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 7:50 AM dave <dmilho...@wletc.com> wrote: > +1 > Dennis, > I look at not only the hardware specs but it interface limitation as well. > Having multiple 10G ports sets that model up for a good edge router not > intended for nat. > > > On 3/1/21 4:22 PM, Dennis Burgess wrote: > > We have customers with dual 10gig bonded links running 12-15gig inbound with > 1072s and full tables without issues. Note, no connecting tracking. Its > more about knowing their limitations and working around those. We would > simply put NAT at each tower vs at the network edge, creates better design > and allows for each tower to be natted to its local IP. Just my two cents. > > > > Dennis Burgess > > Mikrotik : Trainer, Network Associate, Routing Engineer, Wireless Engineer, > Traffic Control Engineer, Inter-Networking Engineer, Security Engineer, > Enterprise Wireless Engineer > Hurricane Electric: IPv6 Sage Level > Cambium: ePMP > > Author of "Learn RouterOS- Second Edition” > Link Technologies, Inc -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services > Office: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net > Create Wireless Coverage’s with www.towercoverage.com > How did we do today? > > > -----Original Message----- > From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of > Adam Moffett > Sent: Monday, March 1, 2021 4:13 PM > To: af@af.afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Official Limitations > > One thing I'll miss about Mikrotik is every router can use every feature. > > > On 3/1/2021 3:52 PM, fiber...@mail.com wrote: > > I guess it depends on what kind of NAT you want to do. > > Here's an overview of CGNAT implementation > options:https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos-space-apps/edge-serv > ices-director1.0/topics/topic-map/nat-junos-cgn-implementations.html > > And which chassies take which > cards:https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/topic-map/ser > vices-pics-overview.html#id-multiservices-mic-and-multiservices-mpc-ms > -mic-and-ms-mpc-overview > > You *can* get started with a MS-MIC-16G , but it doesn't have the throughput > of later cards nor all the bells and whistles. > > - Jared > > > Sent: Monday, March 01, 2021 at 3:31 PM > From: "Adam Moffett" <dmmoff...@gmail.com> <dmmoff...@gmail.com> > To: af@af.afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Official Limitations > > Maybe I was misinformed. > > The VAR told me JunOS would only do 1:1 NAT unless you had an IP > Services card, and that I had to have an MX240, 480, or 960 to use > that card. > > > On 3/1/2021 3:27 PM, fiber...@mail.com wrote: > > If your needs are more modest, I guess you could get away with an MS-MIC-16G > card in a low end MX router. The MIC can be had for less than four grand, as > can an older MX router. That should be good for CGNAT needs under 9 Gbps. > > > - Jared > > > > > Sent: Monday, March 01, 2021 at 1:41 PM > From: "Adam Moffett" <dmmoff...@gmail.com> <dmmoff...@gmail.com> > To: af@af.afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Official Limitations I should have > said it's 5 digits on top of having a Juniper router which can accept the IP > services card (eg MX240, MX480, or MX960). You'll be into 6 digits before > you have the whole BOM. Maybe I should have said "Lamborghini money". > Depends whether you already have the Juniper router or if you had to start > from square one. > I'm not saying there's anything wrong with Juniper, I'm just saying you have > to bring your checkbook if you want to do CG-NAT with them. > > On 3/1/2021 1:06 PM, Adam Moffett wrote: > It's 5 digit numbers, however you choose to label it. > The good news is one box will scale to staggering amounts of traffic. > > > On 3/1/2021 1:03 PM, Bill Prince wrote: > Corvette money. Is that anything like cubic dollars? > > bp > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> > > On 3/1/2021 9:51 AM, Adam Moffett wrote: > CGNAT on Juniper requires an IP services card. With licensing it's like > Corvette money. > ....but that's kinda where we're at isn't it. > > > On 3/1/2021 12:36 PM, Sterling Jacobson wrote: > I gave up the first time they asked me to record data for them during an > instance and wanted us to let it hang and collect data. > > I was like no, not going to do that. > > And then started removing 1072 connection tracking altogether from my network. > > For the time being I’m using 1036 for CGNAT as a transition, then will head > to CHR CGNAT, then Juniper. > > I agree that Mikrotik just isn’t focused on the 1072 anymore and this > particular issue seems beyond them to repair. > > Which makes the 1072 a no starter for anything conn track for us ever again. > > I’ve got one 2004 doing the CGNAT now, and it’s on latest Stable release. > Watching to see if it bails too, or is capable of doing it for the time being. > > But our end game it MPLS/VPLS and/or direct switch VLAN type segmentation of > layer2 into our cores where we will do all of the heavy lifting. > > > > > From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> > <af-boun...@af.afmug.com>[mailto:af-boun...@af.afmug.com > <af-boun...@af.afmug.com>] > On Behalf Of Steven Kenney > Sent: Monday, March 1, 2021 9:03 AM > To: af <af@af.afmug.com> <af@af.afmug.com>[mailto:af@af.afmug.com > <af@af.afmug.com>] > Subject: [AFMUG] Mikrotik Official Limitations > > > Still fighting with Mikrotik about the 1072 reboots. New hardware didn't fix > it, had several people check the configs all were good. After 2 months of > going back and forth, escalating to a higher tier tech... I officially got > a response that 1 million connections is too much for the 1072 and I should > expect it to reboot and not function properly. That was their conclusion. > Even though all of the 72 processors are under 50%, memory usage is only > about 20% etc. Turn off connection tracking is the their solution. > > > > How about those apples? > > > > > > [https://imsva91-ctp.trendmicro.com:443/wis/clicktime/v1/query?url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.wavedirect.net%2f&umid=716DA45E-BC81-1105-BEAE-5D4264E4CB8A&auth=079c058f437b7c6303d36c6513e5e8848d0c5ac4-428bd6b2f07c08fbddbe541bc8783eb8b160e3af] > > [https://www.facebook.com/ruralhighspeed] > [https://www.instagram.com/wave.direct/] > [https://www.linkedin.com/company/wavedirect-telecommunication/] > [https://twitter.com/wavedirect1] > [https://www.youtube.com/user/WaveDirect] > STEVEN KENNEY > DIRECTOR OF GLOBAL CONNECTIVITY & CONTINUITY A: 158 Erie St. N | > Leamington ON > E: st...@wavedirect.org[mailto:st...@wavedirect.org <st...@wavedirect.org>] | > P: > 519-737-9283 > W: www.wavedirect.net[http://www.wavedirect.net] > > -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com[http://af.afmug > .com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com] > > > -- > AF mailing > listAF@af.afmug.comhttp://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > -- Carl Peterson *PORT NETWORKS* 401 E Pratt St, Ste 2553 Baltimore, MD 21202 (410) 637-3707
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
