RE: SD-WAN for enlightened

[Doug Marschke]

Hello Kasper,

I will do my best to answer your SD-WAN question, but as you mentioned it is a 
buzzword that has a bit of confusion in its definitions.  I would say that a 
SD-WAN solution should have the following elements:

1.) Ability to manage multiple WAN connection and choose the path based on user 
and machine criteria (The Hybrid WAN)
2.) A controller to manage the polices and operations of the SD-WAN devices
3.) Analytics on the network and application level
4.) A software overlay that abstracts and secures the underlying networks

Currently there are a lot of solutions out there by many vendors.  Some do all 
of these and some a subset, so it make the landscape a bit confusing.   Lots of 
times vendors use SD-WAN when they are really just talking about Hybrid WAN 
(multiple connections) or WAN optimization.





Doug Marschke
CTO
www.sdnessentials.com
JNCIE-SP #41, JNCIE-ENT #3
415-902-5702 (cell)
415-340-3112 (office)

-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Kasper Adel
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 1:14 PM
To: NANOG list 
Subject: SD-WAN for enlightened

Hi,

I'm not sure if the buzzword SD-WAN is used to compensate for another buzzword 
that got over-utilized (SDN) or it is a true 'new and improved'
way of doing things that has some innovation into it.

I heard different explanation from different vendors:

1) appliances (+ controller) placed in-line to put traffic in tunnels based on 
policy, with some DPI and traffic tagging...(to do performance/policy based 
routing) over an expensive link (MPLS) and a cheap one (broadband) with some 
'firewall-like' filtering capabilities.
2) same as above, with a flavor of 'machine learning' to find a pattern for 
traffic to optimize utilization.
3) a controller that instantiates and tears down tunnels from 'classic routers' 
based on external policies and Network based features to do performance based 
routing over an expensive link (MPLS) and a cheap one
(broadband) with encryption.

Is the above a decent high-level summary?

Has anyone tried any of these solutions, any general feedback ?

Cheers,
Kim

RE: SD-WAN for enlightened

[Doug Marschke]

Too many to list.  I don’t know who is “winning” in market share right now, as 
I am sure each vendor tracks their wins differently.

 

There are definitely a few making more noise than others.

 

Doug Marschke

CTO

 <http://www.sdnessentials.com> www.sdnessentials.com

JNCIE-SP #41, JNCIE-ENT #3

415-902-5702 (cell)

415-340-3112 (office)

 

From: Colton Conor [mailto:colton.co...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2017 6:26 PM
To: Doug Marschke 
Cc: Kasper Adel ; NANOG list 
Subject: Re: SD-WAN for enlightened

 

So who are the big SD-WAN players out there? 

 

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 10:31 AM, Doug Marschke mailto:d...@sdnessentials.com> > wrote:

Hello Kasper,

I will do my best to answer your SD-WAN question, but as you mentioned it is a 
buzzword that has a bit of confusion in its definitions.  I would say that a 
SD-WAN solution should have the following elements:

1.) Ability to manage multiple WAN connection and choose the path based on user 
and machine criteria (The Hybrid WAN)
2.) A controller to manage the polices and operations of the SD-WAN devices
3.) Analytics on the network and application level
4.) A software overlay that abstracts and secures the underlying networks

Currently there are a lot of solutions out there by many vendors.  Some do all 
of these and some a subset, so it make the landscape a bit confusing.   Lots of 
times vendors use SD-WAN when they are really just talking about Hybrid WAN 
(multiple connections) or WAN optimization.





Doug Marschke
CTO
www.sdnessentials.com <http://www.sdnessentials.com> 
JNCIE-SP #41, JNCIE-ENT #3
415-902-5702   (cell)
415-340-3112   (office)


-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org <mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org> ] 
On Behalf Of Kasper Adel
Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2017 1:14 PM
To: NANOG list mailto:nanog@nanog.org> >
Subject: SD-WAN for enlightened

Hi,

I'm not sure if the buzzword SD-WAN is used to compensate for another buzzword 
that got over-utilized (SDN) or it is a true 'new and improved'
way of doing things that has some innovation into it.

I heard different explanation from different vendors:

1) appliances (+ controller) placed in-line to put traffic in tunnels based on 
policy, with some DPI and traffic tagging...(to do performance/policy based 
routing) over an expensive link (MPLS) and a cheap one (broadband) with some 
'firewall-like' filtering capabilities.
2) same as above, with a flavor of 'machine learning' to find a pattern for 
traffic to optimize utilization.
3) a controller that instantiates and tears down tunnels from 'classic routers' 
based on external policies and Network based features to do performance based 
routing over an expensive link (MPLS) and a cheap one
(broadband) with encryption.

Is the above a decent high-level summary?

Has anyone tried any of these solutions, any general feedback ?

Cheers,
Kim

 

RE: OSPF vs IS-IS

[Doug Marschke]

I know we are just talking about the core, but out of curiosity will you
have any MPLS/BGP VPNS that you may want to run the IGP over.  

In this case, OSPF may make a little more sense.

However if you are really just talking the core, I would agree with the rest
of the list, as the decoupling of IP has some advantages and does the TLV
structure.



Doug Marschke
Chief Operating Officer
JNCIE-ER #3, JNCIE-M #41, JNCI
(415) 704-5005 (office)
(415) 902-5702 (cell)
(415)-358-4059 (fax)
www.proteus.net
-Original Message-
From: CJ [mailto:cjinfant...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 5:24 AM
To: jim deleskie
Cc: nanog@nanog.org; Jeffrey S. Young
Subject: Re: OSPF vs IS-IS

You guys are making a lot of good points.

I will check into the Doyle book to formulate an opinion. So, I am
completely new to the SP environment and OSPF is what I have learned because
I have ever only had experience in the enterprise.

It seems that from this discussion, IS-IS is still a real, very viable
option. So, IS-IS being preferred...realistically, what is the learning
curve?


CJ

On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 7:57 AM, jim deleskie  wrote:

> If a network is big enough big / complex enough that you really need
> to worry about performance of mesh groups or tweaking areas then its
> big enough that having a noc eng page you out at 2am when there is an
> issue doesn't really scale.  I'm all for ISIS, if I was to build a
> network from scratch I'd likely default to it.  I'm just say, new
> features or performance aside the knowledge of your team under you
> will have much more impact on how your network runs then probably any
> other factor.  I've seen this time and time again when 'new tech' has
> been introduced into networks, from vendors to protocols.  Most every
> time with engineers saying we have smart people they will learn it /
> adjust.  Almost every case of that turned into 6 mts of crap for both
> ops and eng while the ops guys became clueful in the new tech, but as
> a friend frequently says Your network, your choice.
>
> -jim
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Jeffrey S. Young 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 12/08/2011, at 12:08 AM, CJ  wrote:
> >
> >> Awesome, I was thinking the same thing. Most experience is OSPF so it
> only
> >> makes sense.
> >>
> >> That is a good tip about OSPFv3 too. I will have to look more deeply
> into
> >> OSPFv3.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> -CJ
> >>
> >> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 9:34 AM, jim deleskie 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Having run both on some good sized networks, I can tell you to run
> >>> what your ops folks know best.  We can debate all day the technical
> >>> merits of one v another, but end of day, it always comes down to your
> >>> most jr ops eng having to make a change at 2 am, you need to design
> >>> for this case, if your using OSPF today and they know OSPF I'd say
> >>> stick with it to reduce the chance of things blowing up at 2am when
> >>> someone tries to 'fix' something else.
> >>>
> >>> -jim
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:29 AM, William Cooper 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> I'm totally in concurrence with Stephan's point.
> >>>>
> >>>> Couple of things to consider: a) deciding to migrate to either ISIS
or
> >>>> OSPFv3 from another protocol is still migrating to a new protocol
> >>>> and b) even in the case of migrating to OSPFv3, there are fairly
> >>>> significant changes in behavior from OSPFv2 to be aware of (most
> >>>> notably
> >>>> authentication, but that's fodder for another conversation).
> >>>>
> >>>> -Tony
> >
> > This topic is a 'once a month' on NANOG, I'm sure we could check
> > the archives for some point-in-time research but  I'm curious to learn
> > if anyone maintains statistics?
> >
> > It would be interesting to see statistics on how many service providers
> run
> > either protocol.  IS-IS has, for some years, been the de facto choice
for
> SP's
> > and as a result the vendor and standardisation community 'used to'
> develop
> > SP features more often for IS-IS.  IS-IS was, therefore, more 'mature'
> than OSPF
> > for SP's.  I wonder if this is still the case?
> >
> > For me, designing an IGP with IS-IS is much easier than it is with OSPF.
> > Mesh groups are far easier to plan (more straightforward) easier to
> change
> > than OSPF areas.  As for junior noc staff touching much of anything to
do
> > with an ISP's IGP at 2am, wake me up instead.
> >
> > jy
> >>>>
> >
>



-- 
CJ

http://convergingontheedge.com <http://www.convergingontheedge.com>

RE: Cumulus List

[Doug Marschke]

I can help..contact me off list.


Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® 4, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone


 Original message 
From: Skeeve Stevens  
Date: 02/10/2015  5:44 PM  (GMT-08:00) 
To: nanog@nanog.org 
Subject: Cumulus List 

Hi all,

I am looking to get a better understanding of some features of Cumulus
Linux their pre-sales is a bit inundated, but I am wondering if there
is a Cisco-NSP or something similar out there for Cumulus...

Thanks :)

...Skeeve

*Skeeve Stevens - Founder & Chief Network Architect*
eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
Email: ske...@eintellegonetworks.com ; Web: eintellegonetworks.com

Phone: 1300 239 038 ; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; Skype: skeeve

Facebook: eintellegonetworks  ;
Twitter: eintellego 

LinkedIn: /in/skeeve  ; Expert360: Profile



The Experts Who The Experts Call
Juniper - Cisco - Cumulus Linux - Cloud - Consulting - IPv4 Brokering