On 25-06-14 04:57, Aris Lambrianidis wrote:
How much ahead of my time would I be if I was to ask for CFP/CFP2
transceivers supporting MACsec? (at a reasonably competitive price)
So far, most requests I got were for 1 Gbps, and some for 10 Gbps.
You're the first to mention 100 Gbps, so my guess
>> i have always been fond of rfc 4808 and not the unnecessarily complex
>> alternatives such as tcp-ao.
> sure... but to do this you have to be able to program the keys from
> the platform the SFP is plugged into.. .not via the sfp itself
> (outside the chassis)
i was advocating the general metho
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>>> Solution could be same as for tunable optics, first you tune with
>>> eeprommer until CLI gets support.
>>> Remote legs could have their own eeprommer, which can be easy enough
>>> to use not to require training and costs like 10EUR.
>> it's g
As we announced nearly a year ago, DNSresolvers.com open resolvers
shutdown is imminent.
If you are still using dnsresolvers.com for lookups, this will stop
working when we shut it down. Check your resolver lists for:
205.210.42.205
64.68.200.200
and remove them.
We will be back with a more se
How much ahead of my time would I be if I was to ask for CFP/CFP2
transceivers supporting MACsec? (at a reasonably competitive price)
--Aris
>> Solution could be same as for tunable optics, first you tune with
>> eeprommer until CLI gets support.
>> Remote legs could have their own eeprommer, which can be easy enough
>> to use not to require training and costs like 10EUR.
> it's going to be hard to schedule a key roll then, right?
i ha
On Jun 24, 2014, at 4:37 PM, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> Cheap DIY SFP programmer using a Raspberry Pi:
>
> http://eoinpk.blogspot.com/2014/05/raspberry-pi-and-programming-eeproms-on.html
>
> Software:
>
> https://code.google.com/p/sfppi/
>
> Now we just need some code to brute-force the OEM pas
Cheap DIY SFP programmer using a Raspberry Pi:
http://eoinpk.blogspot.com/2014/05/raspberry-pi-and-programming-eeproms-on.html
Software:
https://code.google.com/p/sfppi/
Now we just need some code to brute-force the OEM passwords... How
fast is the 2-wire bus on SFPs?
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at
That is one way to deal with it.
:)
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: supp...@snappytelecom.net
- Original Message -
> From: "Nick Hilliard"
> To: "Faisal Imtiaz"
> Cc: "NANOG"
On 24/06/2014 21:23, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> I was wanting to know if there is anyone who has such code for the Finisar
> SFP/SFP+.
there's a clear solution here: if a vendor locks the transceiver from
reprogramming, don't buy transceivers from them.
Nick
Hi Nick,
Thanks for the reply, and yes, your assumption is correct.
I was exploring / wanting to know the 'code' for re-programing Finisar SFP/SFP+
I do have a programmer and the software that goes with it.
Many for the SFP/SFP+ mfg. have 'locked' eeproms, they require a special
sequence of cod
On 24/06/2014 17:39, Faisal Imtiaz wrote:
> Anyone out there, know what is the 'code' sequence for programming Finisar
> SFP / SFP+ ?
this is a very broken question. I'm going to assume you have a bunch of
finisar transceivers and you want to reprogram them to look like e.g. cisco
or juniper or
On 24-06-14 17:50, Christopher Morrow wrote:
So.. now when my SFP in Elbonia dies I need to get a truck to Elbonia
AND it's paired link in west caledonia? yikes. Also, is that a
'ybFxasasdasd' on the serial-number/key-pair-note or ybfXasdadasdsd'
Gosh joe I'm not sure...
Obviously this solution
Hi
As from Tata AS6453 looking glass:
Router: gin-laa-mcore3
Site: US, Los angeles, LAA
Command: ping ip 216.6.87.114
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 216.6.87.114, timeout is 2 seconds:
!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/4 ms
So basically that IP/router
DIP switches?
Frank
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Saku Ytti
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 3:21 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: MACsec SFP
On (2014-06-24 09:59 +0200), Pieter Hulshoff wrote:
Hi Pieter,
> I've seen this request from other
Here is what I get from a trace route, I am in Los Angeles.
Tracing route to 128.199.162.241 over a maximum of 30 hops
1<1 ms<1 ms<1 ms 172.25.0.137
214 ms16 ms14 ms 208.179.145.213
3 7 ms 5 ms 6 ms cr01.lax1.tierzero.net [216.31.153.48]
4 7 ms
Hmm, wandering pie-in-the-sky module wish list...
MACsec would be great, hopefully in an easy to manage/replace form.
Separately tunable transmitters and receivers; in both DWDM and CWDM
flavors. This would reduce the number of different parts to track/stock,
and enable the use of simple splitter
On Jun 24, 2014, at 2:25 PM, rw...@ropeguru.com wrote:
> It has been one of those days that doing a reverse had not occurred to me to
> try as suggested by another reply. I am seeing about the same on the reverse
> so I am good to go.
Keep in mind that latency isn't the end-all-be-all in measu
On 6/24/14 10:49 AM, rw...@ropeguru.com wrote:
> I am doing some testing between my Comcast Business connection and a
> Singapore server that I have just setup. I am seeing high latency to the
> server but it appears it is the Comcast to TATA link and not the link
> between the U.S. and Singapore.
Now that I look at it again, I believe you are correct. This is my
first overseas server so I was not really sure what to expect in
latency.
It has been one of those days that doing a reverse had not occurred to
me to try as suggested by another reply. I am seeing about the same on
the reve
260ms from VA to SG is about right. I'd suspect
the DNS is wrong in this case, as otherwise
they somehow went from LAX to SG in less
than 10ms--and if they found a way to do that,
I suspect they'd have a *lot* more customers
beating down their doors to get onto that pathway. :P
Matt
On Tue, J
I am doing some testing between my Comcast Business connection and a
Singapore server that I have just setup. I am seeing high latency to
the server but it appears it is the Comcast to TATA link and not the
link between the U.S. and Singapore. At least that is what I can
gather from the reverse
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On (2014-06-24 12:30 -0400), Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
>> it's going to be hard to schedule a key roll then, right? I would
>> expect that in most/many deployments where someone enters a 'key'
>> there has to be some compliance process that inc
On (2014-06-24 12:30 -0400), Christopher Morrow wrote:
> it's going to be hard to schedule a key roll then, right? I would
> expect that in most/many deployments where someone enters a 'key'
> there has to be some compliance process that includes: "And you change
> that key every X days" right? So
Anyone out there, know what is the 'code' sequence for programming Finisar SFP
/ SFP+ ?
Any and all assistance will be greatly appreciated (off list is fine).
Thanks.
Faisal Imtiaz
Snappy Internet & Telecom
7266 SW 48 Street
Miami, FL 33155
Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232
Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Op
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On (2014-06-24 11:50 -0400), Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
>> Programmable seems like the way to go, provided there's a path to do
>> that in the cli of the device you plugged the SFP into? (which I think
>> is the hard part actually, right?)
>
>
On (2014-06-24 11:50 -0400), Christopher Morrow wrote:
> Programmable seems like the way to go, provided there's a path to do
> that in the cli of the device you plugged the SFP into? (which I think
> is the hard part actually, right?)
Solution could be same as for tunable optics, first you tune
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Pieter Hulshoff wrote:
> On 24-6-2014 15:50, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Pieter Hulshoff
>> wrote:
>>
>>> features they should have. I'll then try to build a business case to get
>>> the
>>> product developed. MACsec is current
We cordially invite you to submit papers to the 22nd IEEE International
Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP2014) CoolSDN Workshop
http://icnp14.cs.unc.edu/workshops.html , which will be held on October 21,
in Raleigh, North Carolina, United States.
The submission information can be found at
On 24-6-2014 15:50, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Pieter Hulshoff wrote:
features they should have. I'll then try to build a business case to get the
product developed. MACsec is currently on the top of my own list, but I'll
gladly pass other ideas to my colleagues
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 3:59 AM, Pieter Hulshoff wrote:
> features they should have. I'll then try to build a business case to get the
> product developed. MACsec is currently on the top of my own list, but I'll
> gladly pass other ideas to my colleagues.
what would be your key management strate
On 24-6-2014 11:09, Saku Ytti wrote:
On (2014-06-24 10:55 +0200), Pieter Hulshoff wrote:
So basically a 1G connection to the switch, buffering with frame drop, and a
tri-rate RJ45 connector? Sounds like something that could easily be built
Yes, also similar solution for 10GE SFP+.
What about
On (2014-06-24 10:55 +0200), Pieter Hulshoff wrote:
> So basically a 1G connection to the switch, buffering with frame drop, and a
> tri-rate RJ45 connector? Sounds like something that could easily be built
Yes, also similar solution for 10GE SFP+.
Not sure what price should be 50EUR for 1GE and
On 24-6-2014 10:21, Saku Ytti wrote:
For this solution to be marketable, it needs to be extremely cheap, as
you're essentially competing against cheapest consumer grade switches
to subrate a port. These ports would not be revenue generating, but
almost invariably MGMT ports to legacy equipment,
On (2014-06-24 09:59 +0200), Pieter Hulshoff wrote:
Hi Pieter,
> I've seen this request from others as well. Do you have any
> proposal/preference to limit the data rate from the switch?
For this solution to be marketable, it needs to be extremely cheap, as you're
essentially competing against c
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 12:59 AM, Pieter Hulshoff wrote:
> On 24-6-2014 8:37, Saku Ytti wrote:
>>
>> On (2014-06-23 11:13 +0200), Pieter Hulshoff wrote:
>>
>>> feature and market information for such a device, and I would welcome
>>> some
>>> feedback from interested people. Discussion about other
On 24-6-2014 8:37, Saku Ytti wrote:
On (2014-06-23 11:13 +0200), Pieter Hulshoff wrote:
feature and market information for such a device, and I would welcome some
feedback from interested people. Discussion about other types of smart SFPs
would also be welcome. Feel free to contact me directly
Totally agree with Ytti subrated sfp Yummy
Andreas Larsen
IP-Only AB | Postadress: 753 81 UPPSALA | Besöksadress Uppsala: S:t Persg 6
Besöksadress Stockholm: N Stationsg 69 | Vxl: +46 18 843 10 00 | Mobil +46 70
843 10 56
www.ip-only.se
24 jun 2014 kl. 08:37 skrev Saku Ytti :
> On (2014-06-
On 23June2014Monday, at 22:55, Keith Medcalf wrote:
>> The question at hand is.. Do countries/businesses have to affiliate or
>> utilize any of those services provided by ICANN other than the assignment
>> of an IP address?
>
> No.
except for RFC 1918 and ULA space, which require no
39 matches
Mail list logo
