LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for MICE-DISCUSS Archives


MICE-DISCUSS Archives

MICE-DISCUSS Archives


MICE-DISCUSS@LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

MICE-DISCUSS Home

MICE-DISCUSS Home

MICE-DISCUSS  November 2019

MICE-DISCUSS November 2019

Subject:

WiscNet Remote Switch / Dedicated Remote Switches

From:

Richard Laager <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

MICE Discuss <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 28 Nov 2019 02:08:39 -0600

Content-Type:

multipart/mixed

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (151 lines) , wiscnet minneapolis design mice.pdf (86 kB)

I realize I am sending this on a holiday. This does _not_ require
immediate attention; next week is fine.

----

WiscNet has proposed a remote switch. I'm forwarding their proposal to
the MICE-DISCUSS list per our procedure. You can find it at the bottom
of this message. If you have any feedback for the board, please share
on-list or off-list, as you prefer. Note that the listserv software sets
a Reply-To, so if you are trying to reply off-list, you will have to
_edit_ the To field in your reply.

The interesting question from my perspective, which we discussed a bit
at the last UG, is whether MICE should require remote switches to be
dedicated to this purpose. It's my understanding that other exchanges,
e.g. SIX, have this requirement. The last few remote switches have all
been dedicated, so things had trended that way without it being an
official MICE policy. The WiscNet proposal is for a non-dedicated switch
which is bringing this question to the forefront.

Requiring remote switches to be dedicated is intended to help protect
the MICE switching fabric. It would provide a clean demarcation point,
which is important for applying rules like one-MAC-per-port, etc. It
also reduces the chances of problems in practice due to clean
separation, less complexity of configuration, etc.

Currently, the following remote switches are, to the best of my
knowledge, dedicated:

Zayo (formerly Neutral Path)
Minnesota VoIP
South Front Networks
Compudyne

The following remote switches are not dedicated:
CNS

I'm not sure about the following, but they're probably not dedicated:
Mankato Networks
Northern Lights GigaPoP*

* This is something we treat somewhat like a remote switch, but I
  believe they pre-date the remote switch policy.

Note that the non-dedicated switches are the original remote switches or
their direct successors.

I believe the consensus at the last UG when we discussed this was that:
  - Implicitly: We need to decide the policy.
  - Either way, the policy needs to apply to all remote switches; i.e.
    we don't reject some solely for being non-dedicated while accepting
    others.
  - If we require remotes to be dedicated, existing non-dedicated
    switches need to be grandfathered for at least some amount of time.
    Upgrades to new switches would end grandfathering.

I do not feel confident saying there was a consensus on the actual
question of whether dedicated switches should be required or not. If you
feel I misjudged the consensus of the room in either direction, please
let me know.

If a dedicated switch was required, WiscNet would have to add an
additional switch, which would look like this:

[MICE Arista]
  |
  | 100G-LR4
  |
[WiscNet MICE Remote Switch ] * No VLANs, All Untagged
 |             |
 | 100G-SR4    | 100G-SR4
 |             |
 | VLAN 123    | VLAN 456
 | untagged    | untagged
[WiscNet Existing Switch]
 |             |
 | existing    | existing
 | 100G-LR4    | 100G-LR4
 |             |
[WiscNet MX]  [Iowa MX]

The VLAN IDs (123, 456) are made-up examples.

We discussed this and other alternatives off-list. WiscNet is firmly
opposed to adding such an additional switch. If MICE requires dedicated
remote switches, WiscNet will not operate a remote switch. They will
still upgrade their connectivity to MICE to 100G, but Iowa and MERIT
will likely be left out (unless they decide to get their own MICE ports).

I (and I assume the rest of the board) would also be especially
interested to hear from the other operators of non-dedicated remote
switches. Feel free to reply on-list or off-list at your option.

As per the usual remote switch procedure, after there's been an
opportunity for comments, the next step is for the board to vote on the
WiscNet remote switch proposal. Approving this proposal implicitly
decides that non-dedicated switches are okay, at least for now. It is my
view that we should _explicitly_ decide the dedicated remote switch
question one way or another, so I will also ask for a board decision on
that, but I cannot _require_ such a decision individually, of course.

There is no specific timeline on this, but if you have thoughts, please
share them as soon as possible.

Finally, while this is already public knowledge, I'd like to
specifically disclose that my employer's connection to MICE is on the
CNS switch, a non-dedicated remote switch.

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: WiscNet - AS2381 - Mice Remote Switch
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:22:44 +0000
From: Chris Wopat <[log in to unmask]>

Hi folks, sorry for the multi-week week delay in responding.

I've attached a simplified diagram indicating how WiscNet would like to
connect to MICE. The diagram is separated by three phases- Current,
Proposed, Future.

We are looking to transition from our current 10g connection via
University of Minnesota Gigapop, to a direct 100g connection from the
MICE core Arista switch to WiscNet's recently installed QFX10002.

We would like to have the ability to share this connection with other
Research and Education organizations that may already connect to our
existing switch, as well as a few who may connect to it in the future.

Known entities on the interested list are University of Iowa (AS3676)
and MERIT Network (AS237). This list may grow a little over time, but
it's likely that we'll be able to count this number entities on one hand.

WiscNet is a non profit 501(c)(3) who per our bylaws
(https://www.wiscnet.net/bylaws) primarily serve educational
institutions and do not service commercial entities.

When WiscNet recently reached out asking to become a MICE remote switch,
we were disappointed to hear that a recent(?) policy change was made
indicating that remote switches must be dedicated for MICE usage only.

We will not be able to dedicate this device for MICE usage, nor would it
be cost effective to purchase a separate switch just for this purpose.
We're hoping that there's some middle category here where we're a switch
+ our few research partners, similar to how a few entities are set up today.

Cheers,
-- 
Chris Wopat
Network Engineer, WiscNet
[log in to unmask]   608-210-3965

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.IPHOUSE.NET

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager