NANOG Digest, Vol 26, Issue 122

Thu Mar 25 03:32:38 UTC 2010

Hi Joe
You guys ever mount your racks on Barry mounts= vibration mounts..with so
many shakes you may need to.
RD

>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 17:14:12 -0700
> From: Joe Abley <jabley at hopcount.ca>
> Subject: Re: Earthquakes
> To: Ken Gilmour <ken.gilmour at gmail.com>
> Cc: NANOG list <nanog at nanog.org>
> Message-ID: <69CB2FCE-3D0E-44FE-93F4-8F3776DAD18D at hopcount.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
> On 2010-03-24, at 13:12, Ken Gilmour wrote:
>
> > We had a 6.2 last year in Costa Rica... We immediately regretted where we
> > had placed our racks and are almost finished a project to move them to a
> > concrete floor (rather than that compressed cardboard stuff). Lost a lot
> of
> > hard drives that day! We regularly have quakes between the 4-5 region
> here.
> > By regularly, i mean a minimum of 5 times a year in different parts of
> the
> > country.
>
> If there is interest in data centre provisioning or construction, disaster
> planning or inside/outside plant strategies intended to mitigate damage by
> earthquakes then the NZNOG list might well be a good English-language place
> to get some advice.
>
> Earthquakes of magnitude 4 and up happen pretty regularly (several times
> per week is common).
>
>  http://www.geonet.org.nz/earthquake/quakes/recent_quakes.html
>  http://www.nznog.org/
>
>
> Joe
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:19:54 -0400
> From: "Peter Rocca" <rocca at start.ca>
> Subject: Cogeco Contact...?
> To: <nanog at nanog.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <CBC1F36FC255BE4B85B08EA17298C78A9EDD35 at pigeon.start.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
> Can someone from the Cogeco NOC please contact me off-list at
> roccap2005 at yahoo.com? I have tried ipservices at cogeco.net and
> 1-905-333-7055 without luck. Thank you.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 20:34:52 -0400
> From: "Peter Rocca" <rocca at start.ca>
> Subject: RE: Cogeco Contact...?
> To: <nanog at nanog.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <CBC1F36FC255BE4B85B08EA17298C78A9EDD38 at pigeon.start.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
> Thanks all, success.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Rocca [mailto:rocca at start.ca]
> Sent: March 24, 2010 8:20 PM
> To: nanog at nanog.org
> Subject: Cogeco Contact...?
>
> Can someone from the Cogeco NOC please contact me off-list at
> roccap2005 at yahoo.com? I have tried ipservices at cogeco.net and
> 1-905-333-7055 without luck. Thank you.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:46:27 -0700
> From: Darren Bolding <darren at bolding.org>
> Subject: Re: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers?
> To: Justin Horstman <jhorstman at adknowledge.com>
> Cc: "Welch, Bryan" <Bryan.Welch at arrisi.com>,    "nanog at nanog.org"
>        <nanog at nanog.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <5a318d411003241846ue709334icce03515da414d3e at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Very interesting to see about A10's performance- I've heard mixed things
> about them.
>
> Just an FYI, the newer F5 platforms don't utilize the ASIC's- the
> performance curve of general-purpose CPU's has once again eclipsed what can
> be done with specialized silicon without aggressive (and expensive)
> revision
> cycles.  The ASIC's also could only be used in simpler virtual server
> configurations and with certain subsets of iRules.
>
> That said, nothing else I'm aware of provides the functionality of iRules.
>  I've used netscalers only a relatively small amount- and they are nice-
> particularly if your requirements are within their feature set- but my
> experience has been that things I take for granted using an iRule are
> seriously painful to implement on a netscaler.
>
> --D
>
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Justin Horstman
> <jhorstman at adknowledge.com>wrote:
>
> > The boxes do alright at low load levels. They do not have an asic tech
> like
> > the F5s so choke on large amounts of traffic. Management is a bit
> immature
> > and you will find yourself having to use the CLI and the Gui to
> accomplish
> > most advanced tasks.
> >
> > When we put them head to head A10 AX3200 vs F5 6400 ltm (note: 6400 was
> > what we were looking to replace)
> >
> > Test:
> > 1000 concurrent users from Gomez's Networks Loadtesting platform hitting
> as
> > fast as the requests would close, going through our standard vip config
> on
> > the f5, and the A10 engineering teams 3 best efforts  to beat that config
> > that balanced between two Identical Dell 1950 servers serving  a php page
> > that responded with a random number (to avoid caching). The 6400 we used
> was
> > in production at the time, and was older so we were expecting to get
> blown
> > away, see the results here:
> >
> > F5 - Peaked 160k completed transactions a minute sustained for 10
> minutes,
> > 0 errors, 112ms average transaction response time
> > A10 - Held 60k completed transactions a minute sustained for 10 minutes,
> 0
> > errors, 360ms average transaction response time
> >
> > If anyone is interested in the graphs I think I can still pull them out
> of
> > gomez. Though notable that this was all done a year ago, so things might
> be
> > different now.
> >
> > ~J
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Welch, Bryan [mailto:Bryan.Welch at arrisi.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:35 PM
> > To: nanog at nanog.org
> > Subject: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers?
> >
> > Does anyone have any experiences good/bad/indifferent with this company
> and
> > their products?  They claim 2x the performance at ? the cost and am a bit
> > leery as you can imagine.
> >
> > We are looking to replace our aging F5 BigIP LTM's and will be evaluating
> > these along with the Netscaler and new generation F5 boxes.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Bryan
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> --  Darren Bolding                  --
> --  darren at bolding.org           --
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:50:42 -0700
> From: "Welch, Bryan" <Bryan.Welch at arrisi.com>
> Subject: RE: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers?
> To: Darren Bolding <darren at bolding.org>, Justin Horstman
>        <jhorstman at adknowledge.com>
> Cc: "nanog at nanog.org" <nanog at nanog.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <
> DFA5AECDEC85EE4087D45C463C19B375134183938E at KWAEXMAIL1.ARRS.ARRISI.COM>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Yes, agreed.  I think the Netscaler falls into the category of the Cisco in
> this respect <ducks>.  Seems the F5 gear is the 1000lb gorilla in this
> category and for the most part we have no reason to look anywhere else other
> than doing our own due diligence with respect to the other vendor offerings
> in this space.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Bryan
>
> From: packetmonger at gmail.com [mailto:packetmonger at gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Darren Bolding
> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 6:46 PM
> To: Justin Horstman
> Cc: Welch, Bryan; nanog at nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers?
>
> Very interesting to see about A10's performance- I've heard mixed things
> about them.
>
> Just an FYI, the newer F5 platforms don't utilize the ASIC's- the
> performance curve of general-purpose CPU's has once again eclipsed what can
> be done with specialized silicon without aggressive (and expensive) revision
> cycles.  The ASIC's also could only be used in simpler virtual server
> configurations and with certain subsets of iRules.
>
> That said, nothing else I'm aware of provides the functionality of iRules.
>  I've used netscalers only a relatively small amount- and they are nice-
> particularly if your requirements are within their feature set- but my
> experience has been that things I take for granted using an iRule are
> seriously painful to implement on a netscaler.
>
> --D
>
> On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Justin Horstman <
> jhorstman at adknowledge.com<mailto:jhorstman at adknowledge.com>> wrote:
> The boxes do alright at low load levels. They do not have an asic tech like
> the F5s so choke on large amounts of traffic. Management is a bit immature
> and you will find yourself having to use the CLI and the Gui to accomplish
> most advanced tasks.
>
> When we put them head to head A10 AX3200 vs F5 6400 ltm (note: 6400 was
> what we were looking to replace)
>
> Test:
> 1000 concurrent users from Gomez's Networks Loadtesting platform hitting as
> fast as the requests would close, going through our standard vip config on
> the f5, and the A10 engineering teams 3 best efforts  to beat that config
> that balanced between two Identical Dell 1950 servers serving  a php page
> that responded with a random number (to avoid caching). The 6400 we used was
> in production at the time, and was older so we were expecting to get blown
> away, see the results here:
>
> F5 - Peaked 160k completed transactions a minute sustained for 10 minutes,
> 0 errors, 112ms average transaction response time
> A10 - Held 60k completed transactions a minute sustained for 10 minutes, 0
> errors, 360ms average transaction response time
>
> If anyone is interested in the graphs I think I can still pull them out of
> gomez. Though notable that this was all done a year ago, so things might be
> different now.
>
> ~J
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Welch, Bryan [mailto:Bryan.Welch at arrisi.com<mailto:
> Bryan.Welch at arrisi.com>]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:35 PM
> To: nanog at nanog.org<mailto:nanog at nanog.org>
> Subject: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers?
>
> Does anyone have any experiences good/bad/indifferent with this company and
> their products?  They claim 2x the performance at ? the cost and am a bit
> leery as you can imagine.
>
> We are looking to replace our aging F5 BigIP LTM's and will be evaluating
> these along with the Netscaler and new generation F5 boxes.
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Bryan
>
>
>
>
> --
> --  Darren Bolding                  --
> --  darren at bolding.org<mailto:darren at bolding.org>           --
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
> NANOG at nanog.org
> https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
>
> End of NANOG Digest, Vol 26, Issue 122
> **************************************
>

-- 
Rudi Daniel
e Business Consultant
http://www.svgpso.org
http://oecstimes.wordpress.com
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.” - Bertrand
Russell