[124144] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NANOG Digest, Vol 26, Issue 122
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rudolph Daniel)
Wed Mar 24 23:33:18 2010
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1014.1269481861.25298.nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 23:32:38 -0400
From: Rudolph Daniel <rudi.daniel@gmail.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Hi Joe
You guys ever mount your racks on Barry mounts=3D 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@hopcount.ca>
> Subject: Re: Earthquakes
> To: Ken Gilmour <ken.gilmour@gmail.com>
> Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
> Message-ID: <69CB2FCE-3D0E-44FE-93F4-8F3776DAD18D@hopcount.ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-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 lo=
t
> 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, disaste=
r
> planning or inside/outside plant strategies intended to mitigate damage b=
y
> earthquakes then the NZNOG list might well be a good English-language pla=
ce
> 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@start.ca>
> Subject: Cogeco Contact...?
> To: <nanog@nanog.org>
> Message-ID:
> <CBC1F36FC255BE4B85B08EA17298C78A9EDD35@pigeon.start.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii"
>
> Can someone from the Cogeco NOC please contact me off-list at
> roccap2005@yahoo.com? I have tried ipservices@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@start.ca>
> Subject: RE: Cogeco Contact...?
> To: <nanog@nanog.org>
> Message-ID:
> <CBC1F36FC255BE4B85B08EA17298C78A9EDD38@pigeon.start.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"us-ascii"
>
> Thanks all, success.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Rocca [mailto:rocca@start.ca]
> Sent: March 24, 2010 8:20 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Cogeco Contact...?
>
> Can someone from the Cogeco NOC please contact me off-list at
> roccap2005@yahoo.com? I have tried ipservices@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@bolding.org>
> Subject: Re: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers?
> To: Justin Horstman <jhorstman@adknowledge.com>
> Cc: "Welch, Bryan" <Bryan.Welch@arrisi.com>, "nanog@nanog.org"
> <nanog@nanog.org>
> Message-ID:
> <5a318d411003241846ue709334icce03515da414d3e@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-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 c=
an
> 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@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 hittin=
g
> 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 conf=
ig
> > that balanced between two Identical Dell 1950 servers serving a php pa=
ge
> > that responded with a random number (to avoid caching). The 6400 we use=
d
> 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 migh=
t
> be
> > different now.
> >
> > ~J
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Welch, Bryan [mailto:Bryan.Welch@arrisi.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:35 PM
> > To: nanog@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 b=
it
> > leery as you can imagine.
> >
> > We are looking to replace our aging F5 BigIP LTM's and will be evaluati=
ng
> > these along with the Netscaler and new generation F5 boxes.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Bryan
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> -- Darren Bolding --
> -- darren@bolding.org --
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:50:42 -0700
> From: "Welch, Bryan" <Bryan.Welch@arrisi.com>
> Subject: RE: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers?
> To: Darren Bolding <darren@bolding.org>, Justin Horstman
> <jhorstman@adknowledge.com>
> Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
> Message-ID:
> <
> DFA5AECDEC85EE4087D45C463C19B375134183938E@KWAEXMAIL1.ARRS.ARRISI.COM>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"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 ot=
her
> than doing our own due diligence with respect to the other vendor offerin=
gs
> in this space.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Bryan
>
> From: packetmonger@gmail.com [mailto:packetmonger@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Darren Bolding
> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 6:46 PM
> To: Justin Horstman
> Cc: Welch, Bryan; nanog@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 c=
an
> be done with specialized silicon without aggressive (and expensive) revis=
ion
> 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@adknowledge.com<mailto:jhorstman@adknowledge.com>> wrote:
> The boxes do alright at low load levels. They do not have an asic tech li=
ke
> the F5s so choke on large amounts of traffic. Management is a bit immatur=
e
> and you will find yourself having to use the CLI and the Gui to accomplis=
h
> 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 o=
n
> 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 blow=
n
> 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 o=
f
> 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@arrisi.com<mailto:
> Bryan.Welch@arrisi.com>]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 8:35 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org<mailto:nanog@nanog.org>
> Subject: Experiences with A10 AX series Load Balancers?
>
> Does anyone have any experiences good/bad/indifferent with this company a=
nd
> 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@bolding.org<mailto:darren@bolding.org> --
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
> NANOG@nanog.org
> https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
>
> End of NANOG Digest, Vol 26, Issue 122
> **************************************
>
--=20
Rudi Daniel
e Business Consultant
http://www.svgpso.org
http://oecstimes.wordpress.com
=93The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always s=
o
certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.=94 - Bertrand
Russell
