On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 02:40:47AM +, l l9l wrote:
> However, what I am really wondering is what is the most standard subnet
> length that always can be guaranteed through Internet. less than /24 bit ?
>
while one can get away w/ /24s (if that is all one has) for many places,
As Arbor bought Ellacoya and entered the service control business,
Allot striked back buying Esphion, and it's now called Allot
ServiceProtector. I haven't tested any of those.
Rubens
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 7:20 AM, andy lam wrote:
> Recently I've been searching for something that is compar
Even if a longer prefix like a /24 is announced, chances of people
accepting it is slim. Especially, as you say, if the RIR allocation
is something larger than /24
And I have a feeling acceptance /24 route announcements of anything
other than legacy classful space, infrastructure space like the
In general, announce what you are allocated from the RIR. The minimum
allocation from you will see is a /24.
A couple examples:
http://www.arin.net/reference/ip_blocks.html#ipv4
https://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-ncc-managed-address-space.html
If you are allocated a /22, announce the /22. Do no
"You have to change your server's IP address if you want move your server to
other place"
-> It is very natural case, but some customer could think of it will be okey
to move if they have C class.
but I have different idea. because the border router of that center is
annoucing more greater I
Suresh,
Yes, I guess my concern is close to the second meaning.
It seems so simple. Currently annoucement of /24 seems to be okey, most
upstream providers accept this.
However I wonder if there is any ground rule based on any standard or official
recommandation.
If there is some standardized ru
Chi Young, let me clarify one thing here ..
Do you mean IP allocation as in subnet allocation, swipping in apnic
or through a rwhois server etc?
Or do you mean "what is the minimum subnet size I can announce on the
internet and have other providers not drop it on the floor"?
srs
On Fri, Dec 19,
On Dec 18, 2008, at 9:40 PM, 정치영 wrote:
Hi everyone,
I'm going to rebuild IP allocation policy of my company and I am
looking for some standard reference for my policy.
I have already studied some standard like RFC1518, RIPE181, RFC2050
and I got it is very important to maintain hierachy s
Chiyong,
Check out:
http://bgp.potaroo.net/bgprpts/rva-index.html
Since you are on nanog, you probably get the CIDR-REPORT every Friday but if
not, go surf around at http://www.cidr-report.org
Cheers,
Mike
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 6:40 PM, 정치영 wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm going to rebuild I
On 08.12.19 11:40, 정치영 wrote:
> what is the most standard subnet length that always can be
> guaranteed through Internet. less than /24 bit ?
nothing can always be guaranteed in life or the internet.
but /24s do seem to be fairly widely used. so they probably work for
the folk announcing them.
Hi everyone,
I'm going to rebuild IP allocation policy of my company and I am looking for
some standard reference for my policy.
I have already studied some standard like RFC1518, RIPE181, RFC2050 and I got
it is very important to maintain hierachy structure.
However, what I am really wondering
Imagestream does nice work as well.
Soucy, Ray wrote:
If all you're looking for is basic routing though, it might be
worthwhile just getting a Vyatta appliance.
begin:vcard
fn:Bruce Robertson
n:Robertson;Bruce
org:Great Basin Internet Services, Inc
adr:;;241 Ridge St Ste 450;Reno;NV;89501-20
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:53:43AM -0500, Jan Schaumann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If there's somebody from RCN on this list who I can talk to about their
> DNS (specifically about records that are too large for UDP and fall back
> to TCP), please contact me.
Taken off list. To make this post useful, n.
We spent a good amount of time looking into deploying a home-grown
Linux-based CPE device over the summer.
Generally, Linux is not the issue with performance. You want to focus
on your hardware.
We've seen the best performance with Intel MT series PCI-X server NICs.
When we were testing the PCI-
Dear Joe,
Several different traffic shaping strategies are available, and I think
all of them go far beyond "simple".
ipfw 100 add pipe 1 all from 192.168.0.0/24 to any xmit vlan1
ipfw pipe 1 config bw 95Mbit/s queue 200Kbytes
thats simple.
cons: only 1 route for each network, vrrp failover
> I have posted thos off-list, for the list:
> http://www.lannerinc.com/DM/FW-7550_DM.pdf
> pros: cheap, cf-disk support, low power (~50W)
cf-disk support is pretty easy to add to lots of things. With the advent
of 4GB compact flash modules and CF-to-IDE adapters, it is not too hard
to avoid rota
Hi,
If there's somebody from RCN on this list who I can talk to about their
DNS (specifically about records that are too large for UDP and fall back
to TCP), please contact me.
Thanks,
-Jan
pgpwbzESDAjBY.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Beat Vontobel wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
>> I saw from previous email that Quagga was recommended as opposed to
>> OpenBGP. Any further comments on that? Also, any comments on the choice
>> of OpenBSD vs. Linux?
>>
>> I don't want to start a religious war :-) Just curi
Recently I've been searching for something that is comparable to Arbor to see
what else is out there. Someone suggested Narus.
Anyone out there have an opinion regarding the 2 applications and their
differences? Or another application that is worth noting?
I am currently using Arbor Peakflo
> Not to defend 3Com or anything, but all of their enterprise stuff (for quite
> a few years now) has an extremely similar CLI to IOS. Came out very shortly
> after they got involved with Huawei.
> If you're already familiar with 3com enterprise gear, check out the 4200G
> series for chea
On Dec 18, 2008, at 4:00 AM, Eugeniu Patrascu wrote:
Chris wrote:
Now to look at very affordable layer 2, Gigabit 3com switches with
good pps.
You should take a look at HP. They have very good gigabit switches
and also offer lifetime guarantee on them.
HP actually has a CLI to configur
One final query for this thread if I may.
Our hardware provider has come back with this as an 'easy to source build'
in case we want two or three identical boxes:
Supermicro X7SBI-LN2 motherboard with
2 x Intel 82573V/L gigabit PCI-Express NICs
Does anyone have experience of these NICs before I c
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
Multipath, yes, but flow-based, not per packet.
There exists a patch for 2.4 kernel, but not for 2.6
Or tinker with iptables.
And last I checked, even with multiple 'nexthop' entries, it still
wasn't smart enough to drop a route if you lose an interface.
Eugeniu Patrascu wrote:
Chris wrote:
Now to look at very affordable layer 2, Gigabit 3com switches with
good pps.
You should take a look at HP. They have very good gigabit switches and
also offer lifetime guarantee on them.
HP actually has a CLI to configure the switch, not the crap 3C
Hi Marc,
I saw from previous email that Quagga was recommended as opposed to
OpenBGP. Any further comments on that? Also, any comments on the
choice of OpenBSD vs. Linux?
I don't want to start a religious war :-) Just curious about what
most folks are doing and what their experiences h
Dear Eugeniu,
OS:
Freebsd:
pros: very stable, quagge runs very well, fastforwarding support,
simple traffic shaping, interrupt less polling supported
cons: only 1 route for each network, vrrp failover is not easy to
implement with quagga and ospf, no multipath routing
Linux:
pros: more t
* Alex Thurlow:
> Depending on your WAN interface, there's actually a decent amount of
> stuff out there. The cheaper alternative to me has actually always been
> to get some old cisco hardware with the proper interfaces and use it for
> media conversion. I have a 6500 with Sup1As in it. It can
* Eugeniu Patrascu:
>> Do you know if it's possible to switch of the route cache? Based on
>> my past experience, it was a major source of routing performance
>> dependency on traffic patterns (it's basically flow-based forwarding).
>
> I don't understand your question.
Flow-based routing does n
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
> cons: only 1 route for each network, vrrp failover is not easy to
> implement with quagga and ospf, no multipath routing
Anyone cares about VRRPD when you have Heartbeat?
> Linux:
> pros: more than 1 route for each netw
On Dec 18, 2008, at 4:13 AM, Jeroen Wunnink wrote:
This might be of some use, it's a document written by one of the AMS-
IX engineers, it's a little aged (almost 2 years old) so there
should be some improvement in the numbers, but it might give you
some insight in the bottlenecks when pushi
Ingo Flaschberger wrote:
OS:
Freebsd:
pros: very stable, quagge runs very well, fastforwarding support,
simple traffic shaping, interrupt less polling supported
cons: only 1 route for each network, vrrp failover is not easy to
implement with quagga and ospf, no multipath routing
Linux:
pr
Dear Chris,
One final quick question on the NICs if I can. Following Mike's suggestion
about specific Intel chipsets (82575 or 82576) it looks like it's much
easier to source the chipsets mentioned by David (82571EB). If these NICs
are embedded on the motherboard is it going to be of disadvantag
This might be of some use, it's a document written by one of the AMS-IX
engineers, it's a little aged (almost 2 years old) so there should be
some improvement in the numbers, but it might give you some insight in
the bottlenecks when pushing a Linux server to it's max (10Gigabit in
this case)
Chris wrote:
Now to look at very affordable layer 2, Gigabit 3com switches with good pps.
You should take a look at HP. They have very good gigabit switches and
also offer lifetime guarantee on them.
HP actually has a CLI to configure the switch, not the crap 3Com has.
Thanks to the list again.
There's lots more options than I'd considered.
I think it's likely that I'll stick with what I know, which is Linux not
FreeBSD and Quagga. The lack of a need to learn new stuff is the my main
motivation behind this because I'm unlikely to break things as frequently.
One
35 matches
Mail list logo
