On 14 March 2016 at 00:23, William Herrin wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Yardiel Fuentes
> wrote:
> > Have any of you had the option or; conversely, do you know of “best
> > practices" or “common standards”, to color code physical cabling for
> your
> > connections in DataCenters for
Hi,
I'm not sure I'm keen on a colour standard - especially given our recent
difficulties
sourcing cabling to our spec in certain colours...or lengths!however, what
we do - and others
do based on this thread - is have our own internal colour scheme for
purposes/systems/customers.
fibre is
Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 05:10:26PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Whatever you do, please do not use Flag labels on cables… I HATE
> THEM. They are a constant source of entanglement and snags. They
> often get knocked off as a result or mangled beyond recognition,
> rendering them useless.
Hadn't seen t
Mark,
You are right that makes sense. So as a recap, you were seeing about 45
seconds route convergence time using RE-S-1800x4 w/ 16GB RAM. For a MX104
it took 4min 25sec. I assume a MX80 would be even slower than an MX104.
What about a MX480 with RE-2000's with 4GB of ram? Does anyone have any
s
I don't see TCAM listed either, but as large as HP is I assume they can
afford and use TCAM in their larger routers.
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 1:30 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Colton Conor
> wrote:
> > I would suggest looking at the HP routing line, in North Ameri
Could someone forward me over to someone in AT&T's e-mail department? I've got
an IP that's seemingly mistakenly on their RBL. It isn't on any blacklists
listed at MXToolbox and the logs don't show any recent SPAM like activity. I
filled out their form, but no response yet and I suspect they won
On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 8:32 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
> > No one who is serious about IPv6 is single-homed to Cogent. Arguably, no
> one
> > who is serious about "The Internet" is single-homed on either protocol.
>
> At the very least, no on
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:14 AM, James Milko wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 8:32 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>> At the very least, no one who is clueful about "The Internet" is
>> single-homed to Cogent with any protocol.
>
> s/single-homed/dual-homed/
>
> It's not like losing Google/HE because y
On 3/13/16, Sean Donelan wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2016, Lee wrote:
>> Where does it say test/dev has to be done solely in a cloud data
>> center? This bit
>> For the purposes of this memorandum, rooms with at least one
>> server, providing
>> services (whether in a production, test, stage, deve
One caveat about Cogent even as a third or extra provider.
Because of disputes with eyeball networks, there is significant congestion at
peering points with Cogent. We saw consistent 5-10% packet loss over many
months traversing Cogent through to Charger, Cox and Verizon as well as others.
For
Lol! I am very dextrous... But I prep by pulling off many pieces of tape at
once and lining them up in advance. They don't need to go on perfectly. In
fact, a few wrinkles help to keep the padding in place better than no
wrinkles.
Put a wire around the roll of tape and connect it to a small carabi
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016, Lee wrote:
I doubt anyone really believes that having a server in the room makes
it a data center. But if you're the Federal CIO pushing the cloud
first policy, this seems like a great bureaucratic maneuver to get the
decision making away from the techies that like redundant
On 3/14/16, Sean Donelan wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2016, Lee wrote:
>> I doubt anyone really believes that having a server in the room makes
>> it a data center. But if you're the Federal CIO pushing the cloud
>> first policy, this seems like a great bureaucratic maneuver to get the
>> decision maki
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Lee wrote:
>
> Yes, *sigh*, another what kind of people _do_ we have running the govt
> story. Altho, looking on the bright side, it could have been much
> worse than a final summing up of "With the current closing having been
> reported to have saved over $2.5
At enterprise storage costs, that much storage will cost more than the OC-12,
and then add datacenter and backups. Total could be 2-3x OC-12 annual costs.
If your org can afford to buy non-top-line storage then it would probably be
cheaper to go local.
However, you should check how much of th
I would have concurred on this not so very long ago, but Cogent has made
serious strides in improving this.
In particular, I think Cogent is fairly trustworthy to at least AT&T and
Verizon at this point.
As for Charter, Comcast, Cox, and the like, I’ve come to believe that there’s
really no su
> On Mar 13, 2016, at 20:58 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
>
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 22:21:48 -0400, "Oliver O'Boyle" said:
>> Just place a piece of tape under the padding and it won't slide anymore. 5
>> seconds of extra work per end, though.
>
> I dunno. Your dexterity must be better than mine
> On Mar 14, 2016, at 03:15 , Aled Morris wrote:
>
> On 14 March 2016 at 00:23, William Herrin wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Yardiel Fuentes
>> wrote:
>>> Have any of you had the option or; conversely, do you know of “best
>>> practices" or “common standards”, to color code ph
We don't serve a market. We are a private business. We are multi-homed with
multiple providers, none of which is an eyeball network. Even if we wanted to
peer, most of them are not available in our area, but our the only choice for
some of our employees.
Cogent still has congestion issues at va
I understand. I tend to take a more market by market view of each network
rather than a global perspective. Clearly, for the enterprise use case with a
diversity of users spread across the globe, or even nationally, the use case is
a bit different.
Having said that, I am rather terribly curio
> On Mar 14, 2016, at 04:42 , Eygene Ryabinkin wrote:
>
> Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 05:10:26PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> Whatever you do, please do not use Flag labels on cables… I HATE
>> THEM. They are a constant source of entanglement and snags. They
>> often get knocked off as a result or mang
I wouldn't say that I know what's best. We have had many different providers
over the last 20 years that I have been here. We never had an issue with any of
them until we added Cogent into the mix. Currently we are using a 300MB
lighttower and a 300MB LighPath metro Ethernet connection.
From m
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 11:15:29 -0700, Owen DeLong said:
> > On Mar 13, 2016, at 20:58 , valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> > Especially if you drop it and it manages to bounce through a cutout in the
> > raised floor. That's got to be the single best reason for overhead
> > cabling. :)
> Because itâ
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016, George Metz wrote:
That's an inaccurate cost savings though most likely; it probably doesn't
Politicians and sales people with inaccurate cost savings. Say it isn't
so.
If you think these are $100 million dollar "data centers," maybe a few
billion dollars in cost savin
Datacenter isn't actually an issue since there's room in the same racks
(ironically, in the location the previous fileservers were) as the Domain
Controllers and WAN Accelerators. Based on the "standard" (per the Windows
admins) file storage space of 700 meg, that sounds like 3TB for user
storage.
> On Mar 14, 2016, at 12:19 PM, George Metz wrote:
>
> Based on the "standard" (per the Windows admins) file storage space of 700
> meg, that sounds like 3TB for user storage. Even if it were 30TB, I still
> can't see a proper setup costing more than the OC-12 after a period of two
> years.
--- s...@donelan.com wrote:
From: Sean Donelan
: But if a majority of the "data centers" are a single server
: in a room, the cost savings of moving it to a different
: room may not save billions of dollars. But no one will
: remember.
Many are not one, rather several. For example, in
NANOG:
Can someone point me to the current CALEA requirements?
As an ISP, should I be recording all internet traffic that passes my
routers? Or do I only have to record when and if I receive a court order?
I'm not under any court order now, I just want to be sure that I am
compliant go
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016, Scott Weeks wrote:
It's all phunny money. Real economics are not even considered.
At all.
And what makes your think the Data Center Optimization Initiative is any
different, when they are counting single servers instead of data centers?
If it was a rational, coherent pl
* Sean Donelan:
> When you say "data center" to an ordinary, average person or reporter;
> they think of big buildings filled with racks of computers. Not a
> lonely server sitting in a test lab or under someone's desk.
I suspect part of the initiative is to get rid of that mindset, which
leads
--- lor...@hathcock.org wrote:
From: "Lorell Hathcock"
Can someone point me to the current CALEA requirements?
As an ISP, should I be recording all internet traffic that passes my
routers? Or do I only have to record when and if I receive a court order?
I'm not under any court order now, I j
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 04:49:38PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2016, Scott Weeks wrote:
> > It's all phunny money. Real economics are not even considered.
> > At all.
>
> And what makes your think the Data Center Optimization Initiative is any
> different, when they are counting
--- s...@donelan.com wrote:
From: Sean Donelan
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016, Scott Weeks wrote:
> It's all phunny money. Real economics are not even
> considered. At all.
: And what makes your think the Data Center Optimization
: Initiative is any different, when they are counting
: single servers
Plus a subsequent GAO report accounting for a miscount due to using paperclips
on the history forms.
On Mar 14, 2016, at 4:06 PM, mikea
mailto:mi...@mikea.ath.cx>> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 04:49:38PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016, Scott Weeks wrote:
It's all phunny money.
Yeah, but at the end we will have reduced paper clip losses significantly! Of
course paper clip usage will go up to support the new paper clip auditing
department.
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of mikea
Sent: Monday, March 14, 2016 3:06 PM
To
While we're at it, can somebody point me on the right path for E911. I'm not
looking for a managed service but rather an in-house solution.
Todd Crane
> On Mar 14, 2016, at 2:57 PM, Scott Weeks wrote:
>
>
>
> --- lor...@hathcock.org wrote:
> From: "Lorell Hathcock"
>
> Can someone point m
Hi Job,
the following was posted earlier on another list ...
The rationale behind the renumbering is that the current IPv6 prefix,
2001:500:3::/48, comes as a direct minimum assignment. We were unable to
expand that allocation to a /47. What we (and I'm sure others) have
noticed is that ISPs and
It looks like Google is experimenting with a change in course on this issue.
Here’s a look at the IPv6 routing table tonight on my router bordering Cogent.
*>i 2607:f8b0:4013::/48
2620:121:a000:f0::2(fe80::618:d6ff:fef1:c540)
0
> This is only tangentially related but it looks like HE has surpassed Cogent
> on IPv4 adjacencies. That said the source probably suffers from a selection
> bias at the very least.
>
> http://bgp.he.net/report/peers
>
>
Hit reply by mistake instead of reply all.
> Todd Crane
>
>> On Mar 1
On 14/Mar/16 14:35, Colton Conor wrote:
> Mark,
>
> You are right that makes sense. So as a recap, you were seeing about
> 45 seconds route convergence time using RE-S-1800x4 w/ 16GB RAM. For a
> MX104 it took 4min 25sec. I assume a MX80 would be even slower than an
> MX104.
>
> What about a MX4
40 matches
Mail list logo
