Print

Print


This message is one-part "no opposition" to this request as long as standard expectations and policies are adhered to.


This message is also one-part "pulse check" as the list has been rather silent the last few weeks. Hopefully that just means no problems and everyone is busy taking care of their respective business.





From: MICE Discuss <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Abhi Devireddy <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 5:30 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] RFC: Remote Switch in Duluth
 
Good evening,
I represent 2 different networks in different capacities, AS53740 (optbit, personal research and education) and AS3789 (Essentia Health, https://www.essentiahealth.org/about/).
Both networks are based out of Duluth and neither of them are current members of MICE.
A remote switch in Duluth would lower the barrier to entry for a number of organizations that provide regional content and resources.
For AS3789, it would mean providing better access to telehealth resources in a traditionally underserved region where high latencies and low bandwidth have caused slow adoption.
I would be in favor of a remote switch in Duluth.

Thanks,
Abhi

-----Original Message-----
From: MICE Discuss <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Richard Laager
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 2:52 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [MICE-DISCUSS] RFC: Remote Switch in Duluth

The following is from Ryan Goldberg of Compudyne:

----
Compudyne/AS47096 is interested in operating a MICE remote switch in Duluth.

We have two 10G paths from 511 to Duluth (one on Charter, one on
Enventis) in a ring of 5 Juniper MX boxes (2 at 511, 3 in Duluth – the 3 in Duluth are interconnected over dark fiber).  We hit a little over 5G on 5min averages in total between the two 511<->Duluth legs.  Latency is 4-5ms.

We currently participate in MICE via MNVoip’s extension, mainly because it makes more overall sense to pick up MICE + SIX + Denver + KC all on one interface (for now).  We’d probable leave it like that for a while.

For the proposed extension switch we’d do a two site VPLS config on the MXes, with on a fresh, dedicated 10gig port at 511 and corresponding 10gig port in Duluth.  We’d start with an EX4200-24F in Duluth, and run the usual Juniper-y stuff (from http://micemn.net/technical.html).
Initial participants would only be on 1gig ports on the 4200.

As for location, we’re currently leaning toward “the Missabe Building”
at 227 W 1st St, Duluth, MN  – this is our primary downtown Duluth POP, and aside from our fiber, and there’s high-count fiber from at least 5 other carriers in the building.  The space has dual AC and is backed by generator power.

Upgrade path is 100G 511<->Duluth, at least on one leg.  If business drives it, we’ll just do it.  Otherwise it’s budgeted for next year.  As for the switch, we’d move to a ex4550.
----

Without taking any position on this here yet, I'd like to highlight a couple of facts:

The proposed transport is over a VPLS link (i.e. shared with other traffic, not a dedicated wave).

In the past, and quite possibly still, we have had participants connected over shared links, but not entire remote switches.

--
Richard


To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link:
http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1