RE: Peter's Mom's house.. ...but the hop count from your side would be
painful! :-)
I will have some time to look at this on Thursday unless someone else
would like to do it for me... PLEASE...???
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Bob Armstrong
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 3:33 PM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] Circuit costs
I believe that we need a map to figure this out correctly.
Absolutely - all we need now is a volunteer :-)
Don't I remember that someone once plotted a bunch of the locations on
a
Google map? That's probably not the best depiction, but it'd be a place
to
start, especially if we could overlay lines for the connections.
The only other comment that I'd make is to remember that bandwidth
isn't
necessarily related to geography. Just because two sites are physically
close doesn't mean that's the most efficient connection.
Heck, Peter's Mom's house in Sweden has more bandwidth then all of us
combined - we should just make her the hub :-)
Bob
I believe that we need a map to figure this out correctly.
Absolutely - all we need now is a volunteer :-)
Don't I remember that someone once plotted a bunch of the locations on a
Google map? That's probably not the best depiction, but it'd be a place to
start, especially if we could overlay lines for the connections.
The only other comment that I'd make is to remember that bandwidth isn't
necessarily related to geography. Just because two sites are physically
close doesn't mean that's the most efficient connection.
Heck, Peter's Mom's house in Sweden has more bandwidth then all of us
combined - we should just make her the hub :-)
Bob
I clearly forgot about the DECsystems!
The costs on my network were based on the fact that I run both the
bridge and the tunnels. In addition I took into account that some areas
connect into my site as well as either Bob's or Sampsa's. I calculated
the costs per circuit and came up with the values that I use. My values
only work one way though and did not take into consideration what the
other end used UNLESS I could influence that end. I do influence
several, but not all of the connections into this network.
I believe that we need a map to figure this out correctly. Just stating
that everyone should be using a particular value does not always work.
As an example look at Fred's network (area 33 - mid America). In theory
he is connected to both area 2 (West Coast), and area 19 (East Coast) -
let's forget the new link to Europe for the moment because that has
issues that have yet to be addressed. The connection between the US and
Europe mostly goes from the East Coast, so in Fred's case the costs (at
Fred's end at a mimimum) should be set to favour the Eastern route.
This is just one example, I expect that this is not an isolated case.
Fred's network has multiple routes because, let's face it, links fail!
It is the right choice (for his network).
One way to look at this might be to declare a fixed set of Multinet hubs
and map against that. In the US it does makes sense to pick a Western
and Eastern hub. Each area in the US connects to both hubs. These hubs
connect to Europe at the same points, either the bridge, the tunnels, or
both. I see this as a maximum availability plan. We would still need
to look at link speeds and Internet hop counts but it could (should)
work. This same plan could be applied to anywhere. I only have first
hand knowledge of the US sites.
I prefer the tunnels for data intensive transactions but use the bridge
for LAT and MOM/MOP. I do have the flexibility to manimulate the costs
at any time to deal with network loads. I do this when I have to copy
large numbers of files to/form Europe against the requirement to use
LAT. In the past this network (SGC::) has been used to backup files
from nodes in Europe (just in case). The link favored has always been
the tunnel when available. This can be controlled in an automatic
fashion and in fact is. I suspect that noone has ever known when the
switches have occurred - just as it should be.
Regards,
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Peter Lothberg
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 1:22 PM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] Circuit costs
LAN costs are 4 by default (for VMS nodes anyway).
Maybe on VMS, but check MIM - the UNA-0 cost is 3, not 4.
I've seen both values used; I think the default must vary depending
on the
system or OS version.
Bob
Topsxx default
NCP>sh cir ni-0-0 char
NCP>
17:19:20 NCP
Request # 52; Show Circuit Characteristics Completed
Circuit = NI-0-0
Service = Enabled
Cost = 1
Maximum Routers = 16
Router Priority = 10
Hello Timer = 15
Type = Ethernet
Adjacent Node = 59.11 (DIMMA)
Listen Timer = 45
Circuit = NI-0-0
Adjacent Node = 59.58 (STUPI)
Listen Timer = 45
(if there are more than one area router on the same LAN it will
use the one with the highest node number, no metrics...)
-P
LAN costs are 4 by default (for VMS nodes anyway).
Maybe on VMS, but check MIM - the UNA-0 cost is 3, not 4.
I've seen both values used; I think the default must vary depending on the
system or OS version.
Bob
Topsxx default
NCP>sh cir ni-0-0 char
NCP>
17:19:20 NCP
Request # 52; Show Circuit Characteristics Completed
Circuit = NI-0-0
Service = Enabled
Cost = 1
Maximum Routers = 16
Router Priority = 10
Hello Timer = 15
Type = Ethernet
Adjacent Node = 59.11 (DIMMA)
Listen Timer = 45
Circuit = NI-0-0
Adjacent Node = 59.58 (STUPI)
Listen Timer = 45
(if there are more than one area router on the same LAN it will
use the one with the highest node number, no metrics...)
-P
Hey folks...
LAN costs are 4 by default (for VMS nodes anyway). If we make use of
that then all we have to touch are the Multinet circuits. I set my
Multinet circuits to 3 because they are much faster and I would prefer
to use the most "efficient" path possible. You will loose the ability
to use SET HOST/LAT, and MOM/MOP, and LAD/LAST, but that should me
minor...
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Bob Armstrong
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 10:00 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: [HECnet] Circuit costs
Peter Lothberg wrote:
Here is a suggestion....
Set all Multinet links to cost 5 in both ends
Set all bridged Ethernet interfaces to 10
Set all Multinet link nodes Level2 Area Routers =20
Well, I like it. I'll do it if you do it...
Actually that's a problem with DECnet - everybody _has_ to do their
own;
circuit costs are individually defined per node.
Bob
That's why I suggested that the ones with LAN's attached to WAN-bridges up
their metrics. So Normal Ethernet-Ethernet will be prefered over Ip-tunnels..
ETPTH>legato
[Routing path from SOL (59.10) to LEGATO (2.1)]
Ok,
Then let's make the Multinet links by default to be 2. I would avoid 1,
for now unless you need to force something.
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Bob Armstrong
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 10:55 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: RE: [HECnet] Circuit costs
LAN costs are 4 by default (for VMS nodes anyway).
Maybe on VMS, but check MIM - the UNA-0 cost is 3, not 4.
I've seen both values used; I think the default must vary depending on
the
system or OS version.
Bob
LAN costs are 4 by default (for VMS nodes anyway).
Maybe on VMS, but check MIM - the UNA-0 cost is 3, not 4.
I've seen both values used; I think the default must vary depending on the
system or OS version.
Bob
One script does it all. I am reworking the script so that the host will
not have to reboot. Should be ready later today. The only issue left
is the email forwarder is down (CHIMPY::). I am setting up this end to
become an email forwarder/Internet gateway.
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Mark Wickens
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 8:20 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] ROOSTA routing problem
Steve Davidson has a few scripts which will detect an IP address change,
reconfigure the link and reboot the system. Assuming the IP only changes
'once in a while' this is a fairly painless solution.
Mark.
On 27/12/11 12:08, Peter Lothberg wrote:
On 26/12/2011 18:39, Mark Benson wrote:
On 26 Dec 2011, at 16:00, Bob Armstrong wrote:
I assumed (perhaps stupidly) that as long as Chrissie's machines
are
bridged onto HECnet somewhere using Johnny's bridge,
She's not using the bridge, though. ROOSTA has a multinet
connection to
LEGATO (which I don't mind, but as Johnny said, isn't going to
work).
Okay, well STAR69 has Multinet on it but as for tunnelling between
them
I ain't got a clue, chief, and again I can't guarantee 100% uptime
on the
link if it is opened.
So can you set up a multinet link to chrissie.homelinux.net (warning
IP
address may change ... though it doesn't do it very often and Steve
Davidson can let you know when it does) and let me know your IP
address
and I'll set up a multinet link here. That should do.
If it does down sometimes we'll just have to live with the
consequences ;-)
Chrissie
Someone had "magic" to deal with changing adresses?
Sure I can set up a link, and I'll suggest metric 5..
The VAXen with multinet is 192.108.200.211.
-P
Hey folks...
LAN costs are 4 by default (for VMS nodes anyway). If we make use of
that then all we have to touch are the Multinet circuits. I set my
Multinet circuits to 3 because they are much faster and I would prefer
to use the most "efficient" path possible. You will loose the ability
to use SET HOST/LAT, and MOM/MOP, and LAD/LAST, but that should me
minor...
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Bob Armstrong
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 10:00 AM
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: [HECnet] Circuit costs
Peter Lothberg wrote:
Here is a suggestion....
Set all Multinet links to cost 5 in both ends
Set all bridged Ethernet interfaces to 10
Set all Multinet link nodes Level2 Area Routers
Well, I like it. I'll do it if you do it...
Actually that's a problem with DECnet - everybody _has_ to do their
own;
circuit costs are individually defined per node.
Bob
Peter Lothberg wrote:
Here is a suggestion....
Set all Multinet links to cost 5 in both ends
Set all bridged Ethernet interfaces to 10
Set all Multinet link nodes Level2 Area Routers
Well, I like it. I'll do it if you do it...
I did it on my side.
Actually that's a problem with DECnet - everybody _has_ to do their own;
circuit costs are individually defined per node.
It's the smae problem if you use OSPF or ISIS for IP... -:)
-Peter
(The person you should complain to in this case is Radia Perlman..)
