https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2022/04/13/hsi-agents-honolulu-disrupted-cyberattack-undersea-cable-critical-telecommunications/
Homeland Security Investigations says it was able to disrupt a cyberattack
of a critical undersea cable, adding the hackers sought to target
“infrastructure on Oahu.”
> On Feb 26, 2020, at 12:42 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> since we're at this layer, should i worry about going 3m with dacs at
> low speed, i.e. 10g? may need to do runs to neighbor rack.
No.
We even do this for 100G.
- Jared
> Warren Kumari
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 4:31 PM
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:20 AM Coy Hile wrote:
> >
> > On 2020-02-26 11:14, Randy Bush wrote:
> > >> We use plenty of multi-mode, but only in the data centre, between
> > >> our own kit, for racks within the same cage.
> > >
> > >
Randy Bush wrote on 26/02/2020 16:14:
We use plenty of multi-mode, but only in the data centre, between our
own kit, for racks within the same cage.
so you have to stock both single and multi? hmmm
in-cabinet multimode can make sense, as long as you keep the stock types
contained, i.e. high
Randy Bush writes:
> since we're at this layer, should i worry about going 3m with dacs at
> low speed, i.e. 10g? may need to do runs to neighbor rack.
No, 3m is totally fine for passive DAC, never had any issues with those.
(5m should also be fine, we just have less experience with that because
nah. We do up to 10m on knockoff 40G DACs in production. It's no problem.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:44 AM Randy Bush wrote:
> since we're at this layer, should i worry about going 3m with dacs at
> low speed, i.e. 10g? may need to do runs to neighbor rack.
>
> randy
>
Once upon a time, Coy Hile said:
> I'd expect that from the ToR -> Servers would be MMF, but that other
> infrastructure cabling would be SMF.
> Even using aftermarket optics, putting single-mode transceivers in
> every server and access port would quickly become cost-prohibitive,
> would it not?
since we're at this layer, should i worry about going 3m with dacs at
low speed, i.e. 10g? may need to do runs to neighbor rack.
randy
On 26/Feb/20 19:09, Mike Hammett wrote:
> When you're buying thousands or tens of thousands, you're also not
> shopping off of the FiberStore web site.
Not necessarily :-).
Mark.
On 26/Feb/20 18:56, Brandon Martin wrote:
> On the fixed side, I have enough trouble convincing folks that APC
> and UPC plugs are different
On that note, I migrated our network from DC to AC in 2007, and that was
a major philosophical drama.
At current job, all Transport kit runs DC for hi
quot;Mark Tinka"
To: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 11:05:46 AM
Subject: Re: Hi-Rise Building Fiber Suggestions
On 26/Feb/20 18:33, Mike Hammett wrote:
1G
---
MM $6/ea
SM $7/ea
10G
---
MM $18/ea
SM $24/ea
DAC $9.50-$18/pair (length dependent)
25G
--
On 26/Feb/20 18:33, Mike Hammett wrote:
> 1G
> ---
> MM $6/ea
> SM $7/ea
>
> 10G
> ---
> MM $18/ea
> SM $24/ea
> DAC $9.50-$18/pair (length dependent)
>
> 25G
> ---
> MM $39/ea
> SM $59/ea
> DAC $23-$51/pair (length dependent)
>
>
>
> Not a significant price difference from SM to MM, but DAC is e
On 26/Feb/20 18:30, Warren Kumari wrote:
> Of course, sometimes you don't have the option of SM - you are
> connecting some someone else than they only do MM, or you are
> connecting to a piece of kit which doesn't have replaceable optics, or
> you have legacy cabling which is MM, or... but, th
On 2/26/20 11:43 AM, Filip Hruska wrote:
Some NICs don't support SM optics, so even if you would like to run SM
everywhere, it's not necessarily possible depending on the equipment.
For example, I had issues with some SolarFlare cards which happily take
10G-SR MM but won't take 10G-LR SM.
Is t
> On 26 Feb 2020, at 11:33, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
> I'm certain someone from Flex has NANOG chatter on "Promiscuous Mode" :-).
Yes :)
f
It really depends on what you're interconnecting.
Some NICs don't support SM optics, so even if you would like to run SM
everywhere, it's not necessarily possible depending on the equipment.
For example, I had issues with some SolarFlare cards which happily take 10G-SR
MM but won't take 10G-LR
Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
- Original Message -
From: "Coy Hile"
To: "Randy Bush"
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 10:19:37 AM
Subject: Re: Hi-Rise Building Fiber Suggestions
On 2020-02-26 11:14, Randy Bu
On 26/Feb/20 18:30, Randy Bush wrote:
>
> i wish flexoptix did 400g DACs. we have two boxes from the same ODM
> with interfaces whose sole pupose is to interconnect the two boxes,
> and the optics are coded for different vendors. unbelievable.
I'm certain someone from Flex has NANOG chatter
On 26/Feb/20 18:19, Coy Hile wrote:
>
> I'd expect that from the ToR -> Servers would be MMF, but that other
> infrastructure cabling would be SMF.
I've been designing in-data-centre cabling between routers with MM since
2007. Back then, there was a real material saving in doing that,
relegati
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 11:20 AM Coy Hile wrote:
>
> On 2020-02-26 11:14, Randy Bush wrote:
> >> We use plenty of multi-mode, but only in the data centre, between our
> >> own kit, for racks within the same cage.
> >
> > so you have to stock both single and multi? hmmm
> >
> > randy
>
> I'd expec
> What is more important to us is that the optics are multi-rate. And
> even more important now, is that our 3rd party optics suppliers can
> allow us to code and re-code optics to our heart's content.
i wish flexoptix did 400g DACs. we have two boxes from the same ODM
with interfaces whose sole
On 2/25/20 10:48 PM, Abhi Devireddy wrote:
L2 rings IMHO seem pretty brittle. I know there are L2 ring products
like Juniper BTI, which use ERPS and not strictly STP/RSTP to move
blocking ports, and those seem a little better although it's mostly
statically configured.
For a strict ring topol
On 26/Feb/20 18:14, Randy Bush wrote:
> so you have to stock both single and multi? hmmm
Optics are dirt cheap. We don't pay the equipment vendors for their
flavour :-).
That said, stocking MM and SM is cheaper than stocking just SM, because
we can reliably predict when/where we shall use ei
On 2020-02-26 11:14, Randy Bush wrote:
We use plenty of multi-mode, but only in the data centre, between our
own kit, for racks within the same cage.
so you have to stock both single and multi? hmmm
randy
I'd expect that from the ToR -> Servers would be MMF, but that other
infrastructure c
At the very minimum use bidirectional modules so you will have four
channels. That way you would only have 15 switches on a chain. Also be sure
to configured your STP weight so the cut will be in the middle. So one
fiber will normally be transmitting to 7 switches, the other fiber to the
other 8 sw
> We use plenty of multi-mode, but only in the data centre, between our
> own kit, for racks within the same cage.
so you have to stock both single and multi? hmmm
randy
On 26/Feb/20 17:43, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
> On that note would you gents recommend single-mode or multimode fiber for
> buildings?
Single-mode, for sure. More predictable characteristics when you climb
up the capacity scale, e.g., 10Gbps to 40Gbps to 100Gbps.
We use plenty of m
On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 4:55 PM wrote:
> On that note would you gents recommend single-mode or multimode fiber for
> buildings?
>
> adam
>
>
Single mode fiber for all new installs. There are only few uses cases where
multimode still saves a little money (100G optics) but otherwise there are
only
bruary 26, 2020 9:43:00 AM
Subject: RE: Hi-Rise Building Fiber Suggestions
> Joel Jaeggli
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 4:46 AM
>
> > There are two fiber pairs running up the building riser. I need to put a
> > POE
> switch on each floor using this fiber.
>
On 26/Feb/20 04:32, Norman Jester wrote:
> The idea is to cut the fiber at each floor and insert a switch and daisy
> chain the switches together using one pair, and using the other pair as the
> failover side of the ring going back to the source so if one device fails it
> doesn’t take the
> Joel Jaeggli
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 4:46 AM
>
> > There are two fiber pairs running up the building riser. I need to put a POE
> switch on each floor using this fiber.
>
> You didn’t specify if the existing fiber is single or multi-mode however
>
On that note would you gents reco
If you can go fully dynamically routed, Layer 3 only, this problem
becomes much, much easier to solve given the constraints you mention.
Among others, Ruckus switches will stack over fiber, but nowhere near
30 units. I think the max is 12 and I would not recommend going over
8.
If you need L2, co
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2020 4:46 AM
> To: Norman Jester
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Feb 25, 2020, at 18:34, Norman Jester wrote:
> >
> > I’m in the process of choosing hardware for a 30 story building. If
> > anyone has experience with this I’d appreciate any tips.
> >
> > There
be
optics at each floor which would give you the full bandwidth at each landing.
Hope this helps. I'd be curious if anyone else has ever used DWDM in an
intra-building scenario.
Thanks,
Abhi
From: NANOG on behalf of Norman Jester
Sent: Tuesday, February
XSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> ------
> *From: *"Ryan Hamel"
> *To: *"Bradley Burch"
> *Cc: *nanog@nanog.org
> *Sent: *Tuesday, February 25, 2020 10:45:05 PM
> *Subject: *Re: Hi-Rise Building Fiber Suggestions
>
> How would that work
Intelligent Computing Solutions
>
> Midwest Internet Exchange
>
> The Brothers WISP
>
> - Original Message -
>
> From: "Ryan Hamel"
> To: "Bradley Burch"
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2020 10:45:05 PM
>
quot;
To: "Bradley Burch"
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2020 10:45:05 PM
Subject: Re: Hi-Rise Building Fiber Suggestions
How would that work to solve Norman's problem? That sounds like a lot of money
spending, and setup time, for nothing.
Ryan
On Feb 25 2020,
> On 2/25/20 6:32 PM, Norman Jester wrote:
> I’m in the process of choosing hardware
> for a 30 story building. If anyone has experience with this I’d appreciate
> any tips.
>
> There are two fiber pairs running up the building riser. I need to put a POE
> switch on each floor using this fiber.
I do not recommend doing that, it's 30 members in a single stack. Mine was only
two, directly connected to each other.
Treat your control plane like your L2, don't extend it farther than necessary.
Ryan
On Feb 25 2020, at 9:00 pm, Tim Požár wrote:
>
> Also, Juniper switches will stack over fiber
Also, Juniper switches will stack over fiber. I have deployed Virtual
Chassis over multiple IDFs. The VC ports can be (and highly suggested)
to be in a ring.
https://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos/topics/concept/virtual-chassis-ex4200-overview.html
https://www.juniper.net/documentati
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 25, 2020, at 18:34, Norman Jester wrote:
>
> I’m in the process of choosing hardware
> for a 30 story building. If anyone has experience with this I’d appreciate
> any tips.
>
> There are two fiber pairs running up the building riser. I need to put a POE
> swi
How would that work to solve Norman's problem? That sounds like a lot of money
spending, and setup time, for nothing.
Ryan
On Feb 25 2020, at 8:21 pm, Bradley Burch wrote:
>
> Should consider DWDM or GPON and in those look at passive optical
> technologies that can benefit the project.
> > On F
If you are limited on fiber runs, how about using 10Gb BiDi optics to
limit a ring to say two sets of 15 switches.
Tim
On 2/25/20 8:21 PM, Bradley Burch wrote:
> Should consider DWDM or GPON and in those look at passive optical
> technologies that can benefit the project.
>
>> On Feb 25, 2020,
I'd say a pair of Juniper switches on each floor, with their virtual-chassis
capability. Terminate the top/bottom floor of fiber 1 into switch 1, and the
other into switch two. Create an LACP bond between each floors switches, tag
the necessary VLANs, and put the VLAN SVIs onto the first pair of
Should consider DWDM or GPON and in those look at passive optical technologies
that can benefit the project.
> On Feb 25, 2020, at 9:33 PM, Norman Jester wrote:
>
> I’m in the process of choosing hardware
> for a 30 story building. If anyone has experience with this I’d appreciate
> any tips.
I’m in the process of choosing hardware
for a 30 story building. If anyone has experience with this I’d appreciate any
tips.
There are two fiber pairs running up the building riser. I need to put a POE
switch on each floor using this fiber.
The idea is to cut the fiber at each floor and insert
- Original Message -
> From: "Craig"
> But also you have to consider, there are a large degree of shorter term
> players, who are in/out of the market and play both sides, these do have
> real-time data feeds, and do care about latency. Some shops go as far as to
> only use a certain leng
want the solution.
Ask yourself where the incentives are that drive the observed behavior.
>
> Kiriki Delany
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Leo Bicknell [mailto:bickn...@ufp.org]
> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 10:54 AM
> To: NANOG
> Subject: Re: Hi speed trading -
lto:bickn...@ufp.org]
> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 10:54 AM
> To: NANOG
> Subject: Re: Hi speed trading - hi speed monitoring
>
> In a message written on Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 01:36:35PM -0500,
> valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> > Am I the only one who thinks that if net
From: Leo Bicknell [mailto:bickn...@ufp.org]
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 10:54 AM
To: NANOG
Subject: Re: Hi speed trading - hi speed monitoring
In a message written on Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 01:36:35PM -0500,
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> Am I the only one who thinks that if network jitter can
On 02/17/2012 08:36 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 13:01:36 EST, Rodrick Brown said:
Trades today in the equity markets must be within the national best bid, best
offer price range or companies can be fined by the SEC which is why latency
an jitter can be problematic in f
In a message written on Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 01:36:35PM -0500,
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> Am I the only one who thinks that if network jitter can make you fall outside
> the acceptable price window, maybe, just maybe, the market is just too damned
> volatile for its own good?
I've had an i
- Original Message -
> From: "Valdis Kletnieks"
> On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 13:01:36 EST, Rodrick Brown said:
> > Trades today in the equity markets must be within the national best
> > bid, best
> > offer price range or companies can be fined by the SEC which is why
> > latency
> > an jitter c
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 13:01:36 EST, Rodrick Brown said:
> Trades today in the equity markets must be within the national best bid, best
> offer price range or companies can be fined by the SEC which is why latency
> an jitter can be problematic in financial networks.
Am I the only one who thinks tha
On Feb 17, 2012, at 10:30 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Paul Graydon"
>
>> Anecdotally, I had an interview years ago for a small-ish futures
>> trading company based in London. The interviewer had to pause the
>> interview part way through whilst he investigat
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 10:30:33AM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Paul Graydon"
>
> > Anecdotally, I had an interview years ago for a small-ish futures
> > trading company based in London. The interviewer had to pause the
> > interview part way through whilst
- Original Message -
> From: "Paul Graydon"
> Anecdotally, I had an interview years ago for a small-ish futures
> trading company based in London. The interviewer had to pause the
> interview part way through whilst he investigated a 10ms latency spike
> that the traders were noticing on
On 2/16/2012 3:03 AM, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
Nanosecond Trading Could Make Markets Go Haywire
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/high-speed-trading/
"Below the 950-millisecond level, where computerized trading occurs so
quickly that human traders can't even react, no fewer than 18,520
c
On 2/16/12 05:03 , Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> Nanosecond Trading Could Make Markets Go Haywire
> http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/high-speed-trading/
>
> "Below the 950-millisecond level, where computerized trading occurs so
> quickly that human traders can't even react, no fewer than 18,52
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Jason Chambers wrote:
> On 2/16/12 5:03 AM, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
>> Nanosecond Trading Could Make Markets Go Haywire
>> http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/high-speed-trading/
>>
>> "Below the 950-millisecond level, where computerized trading occurs so
>>
On 2/16/12 5:03 AM, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> Nanosecond Trading Could Make Markets Go Haywire
> http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/high-speed-trading/
>
> "Below the 950-millisecond level, where computerized trading occurs so
> quickly that human traders can't even react, no fewer than 18,5
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 03:03:55PM +0200, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> Anyone who has managed a network knows that when you look at your
> MRTG/Cacti graphs at 5min, 10min ,15min intervals - all looks well.
> Start looking at 1sec intervals and you will see spikes that hit
> 100% of capacity - even on
At 13:49 16/02/2012 +, Jethro R Binks wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> Nanosecond Trading Could Make Markets Go Haywire
> http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/high-speed-trading/
>
> "Below the 950-millisecond level, where computerized trading occurs so
> quickly tha
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> Nanosecond Trading Could Make Markets Go Haywire
> http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/high-speed-trading/
>
> "Below the 950-millisecond level, where computerized trading occurs so
> quickly that human traders can't even react, no fewer than 1
On Feb 16, 2012, at 8:03 AM, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> Nanosecond Trading Could Make Markets Go Haywire
> http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/high-speed-trading/
>
> "Below the 950-millisecond level, where computerized trading occurs so
> quickly that human traders can't even react, no few
Nanosecond Trading Could Make Markets Go Haywire
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/02/high-speed-trading/
"Below the 950-millisecond level, where computerized trading occurs so
quickly that human traders can't even react, no fewer than 18,520 crashes
and spikes occurred."
Anyone who has
On 06/09/2009 15:56, Bin Dai wrote:
Hi:
I am interested in ur question to nanog about doubting whether AS 49463
is reachable thourgh AS 12670.
in ur case, AS 49463 is multihomed. what you want to do,if i am right,
is that you wanna make the following things happen:
the 213.215.28.0/23 is
i am getting one volume of the list thats vol 14.i sure bet i am missing
some vol's. can you give me a hand on this anyone
--
regards
DAVID
68 matches
Mail list logo
