Comments for Packet Rancher

Comment on The Service Provider IGP Question: OSPF or Integrated IS-IS? by jason

jason — Tue, 29 Jun 2010 13:29:41 +0000

Thanks, Johnny. I’ve updated the links.

Comment on The Service Provider IGP Question: OSPF or Integrated IS-IS? by Johnny

Johnny — Sun, 16 May 2010 00:50:28 +0000

I tried IS-IS OSPF differences link and it didnt work. Little bit of googling led me to http://routingfreak.wordpress.com/category/ospf-vs-is-is/

Its the same blog maintained by one of the original authors. You might want to update your bookmarks to point to the right page.

Comment on C’mon, When Will We REALLY Be Out of IPv4 Addresses? by Terry Dickerson

Terry Dickerson — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 14:07:32 +0000

I have read prety much any book or related article that I could find on IPv6 migration and trnasition. One of the more interesting notes that I found out there in “neverland” (also known as the internet, and on page like 20 of a Google search), I found a report form IANA about the exhaustion of IPv4 address space. Do not know how accurate the report was, but IANA expected a full exhaustion of IPv4 space by early 2011. At that time, IANA would cease to give out IPv4 address spaces and go strictly to IPv6.

However, I am having doubts about the accuracy of this report after reading that they are actually recovering unused v4 space from governments and private sectors to help some what relieve the stress. (I did not see anything about the recovery in my readings).

Comment on BGP’s Cool Younger Brother Talks With a LISP by John Day: IP Networks (v4 and v6) are Fundamentally Flawed | Packet Rancher

John Day: IP Networks (v4 and v6) are Fundamentally Flawed | Packet Rancher — Fri, 15 May 2009 19:15:46 +0000

[...] about that fancy LISP protocol we talked about before? Isn’t the separation of location and identification going to make [...]

Comment on C’mon, When Will We REALLY Be Out of IPv4 Addresses? by John Day: IP Networks (v4 and v6) are Fundamentally Flawed | Packet Rancher

John Day: IP Networks (v4 and v6) are Fundamentally Flawed | Packet Rancher — Fri, 15 May 2009 19:14:00 +0000

[...] examine the issue of IPv6. IPv6 is being banked on to fix the inevitble fact that we are of running out of IPv4 addresses pretty soon. Well, the IPv6 folks didn’t think about a fundamental, yet important detail [...]

Comment on Anyone going to FutureNet? by Irwin Lazar

Irwin Lazar — Fri, 24 Apr 2009 20:52:59 +0000

Thanks for the kind words about the event, if any of your readers plan to go, please use the code “NR30″ for 30% off of admission price.

Comment on Anyone going to FutureNet? by jason

jason — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:45:18 +0000

Sorry to add another show for you, but I think it’s essential for anyone interested in keeping up with what is going on in the SP world. Definitely has been a huge eye opener for me.

Comment on Anyone going to FutureNet? by Kyle Flaherty

Kyle Flaherty — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 15:52:05 +0000

Thought my conference schedule was pretty much nailed down, but need to take a look at this one a bit deeper, looks good.

/kff

Comment on The Service Provider IGP Question: OSPF or Integrated IS-IS? by Internets of Interest: 7th Apr - 13th Apr | My Etherealmind

Internets of Interest: 7th Apr - 13th Apr | My Etherealmind — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 20:01:18 +0000

[...] The Service Provider IGP Question: OSPF or Integrated IS-IS? | Packet Rancher - A recent Cisco Blogger, Packetrancher is writing mostly on Service Provider. Focussing on opinions rather than technology and he is good at it. Go and check out his blog. [...]

Comment on ATLAS: Arbor Networks’ Goldmine Should Be Open by jose nazario

jose nazario — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 20:20:23 +0000

hi! i’m at arbor networks and i work on atlas. i’d be happy to chat with you, out of blog comments etc, about access to atlas. please contact me, you have my email address.

thanks! — jose

Comment on The Service Provider IGP Question: OSPF or Integrated IS-IS? by Proteus Networks (Joe Soricelli)

Proteus Networks (Joe Soricelli) — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 15:19:35 +0000

A very nice and concise report! I too am in the IS-IS camp these days but it wasn’t always like that. When I was in Cisco land (CCIE 4803) IS-IS was a bit of a black art. When I look back on it I think it had to do with the implementation in IOS and the use of the NSAP values for everything (brought out my visceral hate reaction to ATM - LOL).

When I moved to Juniper in 2000 (JNCIE 14), I was “forced” to learn more about it as the customers at the time were all heavy IS-IS users. What I found, to my surprise, was that I actually liked it better than OSPF. For some reason I can hear my Mother saying “How do you know you don’t like peas when you haven’t even tried them?”

Anyway, if I was starting a network from scratch I would choose IS-IS without a second thought. A lot of it has to do with the points Jason made above. For me (having a training background) I am confident that I could have an OSPF rock star running an IS-IS network in no time flat. I also believe that there are a lot of folks out there who are proficient in IS-IS but perhaps they are not prolific writers or bloggers.

I DO whole-heartedly agree that it boils down to a personal preference between the two protocols.

Comment on The Service Provider IGP Question: OSPF or Integrated IS-IS? by IPv6Freely

IPv6Freely — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 12:39:49 +0000

I think I actually found IS-IS easier to understand when I was doing the CCIE written and CCNP (Was it on the CCNP? That was so long ago…)

The one thing I would have to say for OSPF is that if you have a problem with it, there are FAR more people around who will be able to lend a hand in troubleshooting. Most people know OSPF inside and out, very few know IS-IS inside and out (though the ones that do, tend to REALLY know it well).

It’s a tough decision. Another issue is that the engineer that replaces you when you leave may not know IS-IS, and while that should at least be a small consideration, it certainly shouldn’t be your primary reason.

Hard to say, really… I guess it comes down to preference.

Comment on What the Hell is Cisco Doing in the Server Market With UCS? by IPv6Freely

IPv6Freely — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:07:27 +0000

I agree. “What the hell?” is pretty much the only real way to respond.

Comment on BGP’s Cool Younger Brother Talks With a LISP by shef

shef — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:58:21 +0000

IP Journal have good article about LISP:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_11-1/111_lisp.html

Comment on Nortel Winding Down Metro Ethernet In Favor of Packet Optical Transport by Phil Ashman

Phil Ashman — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 23:54:05 +0000

This applies to so many companies out there right now. I just wish it was some of the leadership that were going to take the fall when some of these companies shatter. Most of these guys have attained so much wealth that there really is no stopping them. There is just something fundamentally wrong when anyone, no matter who they are, is raking in 50 million+ a year. There always has to be financial incentive, but the diversity of pay between the top and bottom is ridiculous, and I think that is part of the correction that needs to occur. However if it does come to pass, it will be a bloodbath.

Comment on Nortel Winding Down Metro Ethernet In Favor of Packet Optical Transport by jason

jason — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:13:38 +0000

I agree with you 100%, Phil. The leadership is really to blame and I wish that there was some sort of accountability. You fundamentally should never be rewarded for destroying a company, disrupting the lives of those that worked for the company and harming loyal customers that depend on you.

Comment on Nortel Winding Down Metro Ethernet In Favor of Packet Optical Transport by Phil Ashman

Phil Ashman — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 03:26:25 +0000

I’m not sure how rational Nortel is right now. They are in somewhat of a freefall and are flailing to avoid drowning. Their past & present leadership is definitely responsible for the mess they now find themselves in. They truly are suffering for their past decade of poor decisions. Then to hear the execs might be getting bonuses is enough to make me hurl!