MX 80 advantages and shortcomings

Tue Jul 5 15:56:56 UTC 2011

Hi Team,

Can anyone enlighten me on the pros and cons of MX 80 platform

Thanks

Sanjay C.P.

--- On Tue, 7/5/11, nanog-request at nanog.org <nanog-request at nanog.org> wrote:

From: nanog-request at nanog.org <nanog-request at nanog.org>
Subject: NANOG Digest, Vol 42, Issue 5
To: nanog at nanog.org
Date: Tuesday, July 5, 2011, 5:30 PM

Send NANOG mailing list submissions to
    nanog at nanog.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
    https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
    nanog-request at nanog.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
    nanog-owner at nanog.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of NANOG digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. cheapo UUFB solution for Cisco 7201 (Rogelio)
   2. Re: Firewall Appliance Suggestions (Curtis Maurand)
   3. RE: Firewall Appliance Suggestions (Jean CLERY)
   4. Re: Firewall Appliance Suggestions (Peter Nowak)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 11:34:11 -0300
From: Rogelio <scubacuda at gmail.com>
Subject: cheapo UUFB solution for Cisco 7201
To: nanog at nanog.org
Message-ID:
    <CALJphbs6UBWKqGVW1EyvCL6pKGtCKjSYNZB=q70FxPOQ7D0CHA at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I've got a Cisco 7201 with about 500 L2TPv2 tunnels, and I suspect
that UUFB (unknown unicast flooding) is resulting in spiking (I put an
ACL on to kill broadcast traffic, so I'm sure that's not related).
I've googled and don't see anything for the 7201, just the 7600
series.  :/

i.e. http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/7600/ios/12.2SR/configuration/guide/blocking.html

Anyone have any suggestions on (something cheap) that I can put in
front of this box to spare it from (what I suspect) is a gateway that
unicast floods when a MAC address has aged?

To add to my challenges, I'm in Brazil and importing gear is insanely
effing difficult.  :/

--
Also on LinkedIn?  Feel free to connect if you too are an open
networker: scubacuda at gmail.com

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2011 17:40:56 -0400
From: Curtis Maurand <cmaurand at xyonet.com>
Subject: Re: Firewall Appliance Suggestions
To: nanog at nanog.org
Message-ID: <4E123368.7020602 at xyonet.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

On 6/30/2011 12:20 PM, Suresh Rajagopalan wrote:
> Linux + iptables + fwbuilder
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Blake T. Pfankuch<blake at pfankuch.me>  wrote:
>> Howdy,
>>                 I am looking for something a little unique in a bit of a tough situation with some sticky requirements.  First off, my requirements are a little weird and I can't bend them a whole lot due to stipulations being put on me.  I am in need a firewall appliance which can be run on VMware vSphere, with IPSEC support for multiple Phase 2 negotiations within a single Phase 1.  I am also in need of something that can support VLAN interfaces on the LAN side, and ideally something with multi zoning so I can keep LAN side networks separate from each without ridiculous firewall rules.  Meaning build a zone for "Customer network 1" and it displays separately (ease of management and firewall config hopefully).  I need a minimum of 10 "zones" on LAN side (/29 or /30), and NAT support for LAN to WAN (to dedicate all outbound connections to a single IP from a specific zone), ideally something extremely scalable (100-200 zones).  And here
 is the super fun part!  I need something that is going to be web managed primarily as minions will be doing most of the day to day maintenance, or very simple CLI config.  Willing to pay for something if need be, but looking for something that can easily handly 50-100mbit of throughput.
>>
>> Any Ideas?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Blake Pfankuch
>>
Vyatta.  They have an appliance on their website.

--Curtis

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 00:58:51 +0200
From: "Jean CLERY" <jean.clerymrs at gmail.com>
Subject: RE: Firewall Appliance Suggestions
To: "'Curtis Maurand'" <cmaurand at xyonet.com>,    <nanog at nanog.org>
Message-ID: <F7819E52D830406983C30BC43FAD7E3D at ezekiel>
Content-Type: text/plain;    charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi Blake
Try www.netasq.com

Regards,
Jean CLERY

-----Message d'origine-----
De?: Curtis Maurand [mailto:cmaurand at xyonet.com] 
Envoy??: lundi 4 juillet 2011 23:41
??: nanog at nanog.org
Objet?: Re: Firewall Appliance Suggestions

On 6/30/2011 12:20 PM, Suresh Rajagopalan wrote:
> Linux + iptables + fwbuilder
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Blake T. Pfankuch<blake at pfankuch.me>
wrote:
>> Howdy,
>>                 I am looking for something a little unique in a bit of a
tough situation with some sticky requirements.  First off, my requirements
are a little weird and I can't bend them a whole lot due to stipulations
being put on me.  I am in need a firewall appliance which can be run on
VMware vSphere, with IPSEC support for multiple Phase 2 negotiations within
a single Phase 1.  I am also in need of something that can support VLAN
interfaces on the LAN side, and ideally something with multi zoning so I can
keep LAN side networks separate from each without ridiculous firewall rules.
Meaning build a zone for "Customer network 1" and it displays separately
(ease of management and firewall config hopefully).  I need a minimum of 10
"zones" on LAN side (/29 or /30), and NAT support for LAN to WAN (to
dedicate all outbound connections to a single IP from a specific zone),
ideally something extremely scalable (100-200 zones).  And here is the super
fun part!  I need something that is going to be web managed primarily as
minions will be doing most of the day to day maintenance, or very simple CLI
config.  Willing to pay for something if need be, but looking for something
that can easily handly 50-100mbit of throughput.
>>
>> Any Ideas?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Blake Pfankuch
>>
Vyatta.  They have an appliance on their website.

--Curtis

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 00:50:45 -0400
From: Peter Nowak <pnowak at batblue.com>
Subject: Re: Firewall Appliance Suggestions
To: Blake T. Pfankuch <blake at pfankuch.me>
Cc: "NANOG \(nanog at nanog.org\)" <nanog at nanog.org>
Message-ID: <1B8D4E1C-BA43-4257-89DA-7D6EBB154927 at batblue.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;    charset=us-ascii

They don't have a VM yet - coming soon - but you may take a look at Palo Alto Networks. Having just a regular stateful firewall is not a good idea anymore...

Peter Nowak

On Jul 1, 2011, at 12:35 AM, Blake T. Pfankuch wrote:

> Normally I would agree with you as far as separate instances, however this will be in a situation where we pay ridiculous amounts for cpu and memory, so a single instance is what we are shooting for (remember those ridiculous requirements).  I am planning to do some further testing with vyatta and pfsense.  Thanks you all for the on list and off list responses!
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sargun Dhillon [mailto:sargun at sargun.me] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 9:56 PM
> To: George Bonser
> Cc: Blake T. Pfankuch; NANOG (nanog at nanog.org)
> Subject: Re: Firewall Appliance Suggestions
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "George Bonser" <gbonser at seven.com>
>> To: "Blake T. Pfankuch" <blake at pfankuch.me>, "NANOG (nanog at nanog.org)" 
>> <nanog at nanog.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 11:30:53 AM
>> Subject: RE: Firewall Appliance Suggestions
>> 
>>> Willing to pay for something if need be, but looking for something 
>>> that can easily handly 50-100mbit of throughput.
>>> 
>>> Any Ideas?
>>> 
>>> Thanks!
>>> 
>>> Blake Pfankuch
>> 
>> 
>> I might also look at Vyatta.  They have appliances or you can run the 
>> software on your own hardware.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> I would not go with Vyatta if you're doing anything complex. The number of random bugs I've hit with their software are numerous. In the right hands, it's a powerful tool. And it seems to fit your solution really well. 
> 
> If I were in your shoes, I would install two instances that would handle the "edge" of the cluster, and then an instance per customer (lightweight, they sell a VMWare image). Then use dynamic routing to direct traffic to the customer (assign each customer their own ASN, and peer with their instance). So, worse case scenario, the NOC monkey only breaks one customer's gear. 
> 
> 
> --
> Sargun Dhillon
> VoIP (US): +1-925-235-1105

Peter Nowak
Manager, Technical Services
Bat Blue Corporation | Integrity . Privacy . Availability
p. 212.461.3322 x3020 | f. 212.584.9999 | w. www.batblue.com
Bat Blue's AS: 25885 | BGP Policy | Peering Policy
Bat Blue's Legal Notice

Receive Bat Blue's DSB Intelligence Report

Bat Blue is proud to be the Official WiFi Provider for ESPN's X-Games

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list
NANOG at nanog.org
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

End of NANOG Digest, Vol 42, Issue 5
************************************