On 2013-01-12 15:03, Brian Hechinger wrote:
It's not that there are no routers. It's the fact that from a DECnet point of view the bridge misrepresents distance. If there is a tunnel between sites (Multinet, Cisco, etc) it is very obvious there is separation. With the bridge it's impossible to tell if two nodes are physically next to each other or have an ocean in between them.
Yes. That is one additional complication. However, looking at the current output from sampsa, it looks as if ethernet and multinet links are mixed on the same segment as well.
I have some ideas for how to get bridge info but that's for later. There is plenty to do before we get to that point.
The only way I've come up with to represent this in a somewhat correct way is to give each network segment its own id. You can then list, for each machine, which segment(s) it is attached to. And you can also attach segments to each other. And then you can give costs to attachments.
But there is no way NCP can give you this information.
Johnny
-brian
On Jan 12, 2013, at 8:58, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-01-12 14:46, Rob Jarratt wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE]
On Behalf Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 12 January 2013 13:07
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Cc: sampsa at mac.com
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Mapping - getting close
On 2013-01-12 11:41, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Bit more accurate, if messier:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap3.svg
If you ask me, I think this idea is dead. You cannot get a good
representation
of how the topology really is from trying to walk nodes using NCP.
The above picture is a good example of the problems. Looking at it from my
point of view, MIM, PONDUS, ERSATZ, TARDIS, WXP and JOCKE are all
actually sitting one common ethernet. All the lines and seemingly relative
locations are just incorrect.
This time, it would appear as if SG1.1 were the bridged ethernet. But the
picture does it wrong anyway, since there are no multinet tunnels on the
bridge. That would suggest that SG1.1 is some kind of merging of several
actual networks, with no real corresponding entity at all.
Johnny
Isn't this because, in many cases, there are no routers between the physical
network segments?
There are definitely a router in between if we talk about the bridge and a multinet tunnel...
(Or any ethernet segment and a multinet tunnel...)
Johnny
Regards
Rob
sampsa
On 12 Jan 2013, at 10:45, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
That seems to be more in agreement with what A44RTR sees of Hecnet:
5 areas (9,42,52,59,61) are reachable thru dimma, 4 (18,19,20,33) via
SG1 and 3 (3,7,8) via Gorvax.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:07:54
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Mapping - getting close
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:06, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net>
wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 22:03, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:01, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net>
wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 21:15, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 21:14, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-01-12 00:37, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Another with some overlap but less horizontal space:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap2.svg
Looks rather weird. I assume PONDUS.637 is actually an attempt at
the ethernet bridge, but it don't match reality much.
Also, totally missing some areas, like area 59.
And area 9.but Ciscos aren't handled yet. :p
I'm working on that. :)
What's the current plan for solving it?
I'm concurrently attacking it from three different directions: ssh,
snmp
and mop remote console.
My virtual cisco only supports SSH1. ;)
I probably misconfigured SNMP.
MOP remote console might work! How would I test again?
First one done wins. :)
I'd like to get all three working though for ultimate flexibility.
-brian
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff!
http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet
project.
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
It's not that there are no routers. It's the fact that from a DECnet point of view the bridge misrepresents distance. If there is a tunnel between sites (Multinet, Cisco, etc) it is very obvious there is separation. With the bridge it's impossible to tell if two nodes are physically next to each other or have an ocean in between them.
I have some ideas for how to get bridge info but that's for later. There is plenty to do before we get to that point.
-brian
On Jan 12, 2013, at 8:58, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-01-12 14:46, Rob Jarratt wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE]
On Behalf Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 12 January 2013 13:07
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Cc: sampsa at mac.com
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Mapping - getting close
On 2013-01-12 11:41, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Bit more accurate, if messier:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap3.svg
If you ask me, I think this idea is dead. You cannot get a good
representation
of how the topology really is from trying to walk nodes using NCP.
The above picture is a good example of the problems. Looking at it from my
point of view, MIM, PONDUS, ERSATZ, TARDIS, WXP and JOCKE are all
actually sitting one common ethernet. All the lines and seemingly relative
locations are just incorrect.
This time, it would appear as if SG1.1 were the bridged ethernet. But the
picture does it wrong anyway, since there are no multinet tunnels on the
bridge. That would suggest that SG1.1 is some kind of merging of several
actual networks, with no real corresponding entity at all.
Johnny
Isn't this because, in many cases, there are no routers between the physical
network segments?
There are definitely a router in between if we talk about the bridge and a multinet tunnel...
(Or any ethernet segment and a multinet tunnel...)
Johnny
Regards
Rob
sampsa
On 12 Jan 2013, at 10:45, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
That seems to be more in agreement with what A44RTR sees of Hecnet:
5 areas (9,42,52,59,61) are reachable thru dimma, 4 (18,19,20,33) via
SG1 and 3 (3,7,8) via Gorvax.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:07:54
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Mapping - getting close
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:06, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net>
wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 22:03, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:01, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net>
wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 21:15, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 21:14, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-01-12 00:37, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Another with some overlap but less horizontal space:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap2.svg
Looks rather weird. I assume PONDUS.637 is actually an attempt at
the ethernet bridge, but it don't match reality much.
Also, totally missing some areas, like area 59.
And area 9.but Ciscos aren't handled yet. :p
I'm working on that. :)
What's the current plan for solving it?
I'm concurrently attacking it from three different directions: ssh,
snmp
and mop remote console.
My virtual cisco only supports SSH1. ;)
I probably misconfigured SNMP.
MOP remote console might work! How would I test again?
First one done wins. :)
I'd like to get all three working though for ultimate flexibility.
-brian
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff!
http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet
project.
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On 2013-01-12 14:46, Rob Jarratt wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE]
On Behalf Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 12 January 2013 13:07
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Cc: sampsa at mac.com
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Mapping - getting close
On 2013-01-12 11:41, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Bit more accurate, if messier:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap3.svg
If you ask me, I think this idea is dead. You cannot get a good
representation
of how the topology really is from trying to walk nodes using NCP.
The above picture is a good example of the problems. Looking at it from my
point of view, MIM, PONDUS, ERSATZ, TARDIS, WXP and JOCKE are all
actually sitting one common ethernet. All the lines and seemingly relative
locations are just incorrect.
This time, it would appear as if SG1.1 were the bridged ethernet. But the
picture does it wrong anyway, since there are no multinet tunnels on the
bridge. That would suggest that SG1.1 is some kind of merging of several
actual networks, with no real corresponding entity at all.
Johnny
Isn't this because, in many cases, there are no routers between the physical
network segments?
There are definitely a router in between if we talk about the bridge and a multinet tunnel...
(Or any ethernet segment and a multinet tunnel...)
Johnny
Regards
Rob
sampsa
On 12 Jan 2013, at 10:45, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
That seems to be more in agreement with what A44RTR sees of Hecnet:
5 areas (9,42,52,59,61) are reachable thru dimma, 4 (18,19,20,33) via
SG1 and 3 (3,7,8) via Gorvax.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:07:54
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Mapping - getting close
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:06, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net>
wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 22:03, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:01, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net>
wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 21:15, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 21:14, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-01-12 00:37, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Another with some overlap but less horizontal space:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap2.svg
Looks rather weird. I assume PONDUS.637 is actually an attempt at
the ethernet bridge, but it don't match reality much.
Also, totally missing some areas, like area 59.
And area 9.but Ciscos aren't handled yet. :p
I'm working on that. :)
What's the current plan for solving it?
I'm concurrently attacking it from three different directions: ssh,
snmp
and mop remote console.
My virtual cisco only supports SSH1. ;)
I probably misconfigured SNMP.
MOP remote console might work! How would I test again?
First one done wins. :)
I'd like to get all three working though for ultimate flexibility.
-brian
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff!
http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet
project.
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE]
On Behalf Of Johnny Billquist
Sent: 12 January 2013 13:07
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Cc: sampsa at mac.com
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Mapping - getting close
On 2013-01-12 11:41, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Bit more accurate, if messier:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap3.svg
If you ask me, I think this idea is dead. You cannot get a good
representation
of how the topology really is from trying to walk nodes using NCP.
The above picture is a good example of the problems. Looking at it from my
point of view, MIM, PONDUS, ERSATZ, TARDIS, WXP and JOCKE are all
actually sitting one common ethernet. All the lines and seemingly relative
locations are just incorrect.
This time, it would appear as if SG1.1 were the bridged ethernet. But the
picture does it wrong anyway, since there are no multinet tunnels on the
bridge. That would suggest that SG1.1 is some kind of merging of several
actual networks, with no real corresponding entity at all.
Johnny
Isn't this because, in many cases, there are no routers between the physical
network segments?
Regards
Rob
sampsa
On 12 Jan 2013, at 10:45, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
That seems to be more in agreement with what A44RTR sees of Hecnet:
5 areas (9,42,52,59,61) are reachable thru dimma, 4 (18,19,20,33) via
SG1 and 3 (3,7,8) via Gorvax.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:07:54
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Mapping - getting close
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:06, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net>
wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 22:03, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:01, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net>
wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 21:15, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 21:14, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-01-12 00:37, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Another with some overlap but less horizontal space:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap2.svg
Looks rather weird. I assume PONDUS.637 is actually an attempt at
the ethernet bridge, but it don't match reality much.
Also, totally missing some areas, like area 59.
And area 9.but Ciscos aren't handled yet. :p
I'm working on that. :)
What's the current plan for solving it?
I'm concurrently attacking it from three different directions: ssh,
snmp
and mop remote console.
My virtual cisco only supports SSH1. ;)
I probably misconfigured SNMP.
MOP remote console might work! How would I test again?
First one done wins. :)
I'd like to get all three working though for ultimate flexibility.
-brian
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff!
http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet
project.
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On 2013-01-12 14:22, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Johnny, that's just an example graph - we have all the links etc collected as CSV too, which can be manipulated etc.
Admittedly the bridge adds some weirdness to this all, if everything was multinet then the walk would be easy :)
Why? In which way is the bridge any more strange than any ethernet segment?
Johnny
sampsa
On 12 Jan 2013, at 15:06, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-01-12 11:41, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Bit more accurate, if messier:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap3.svg
If you ask me, I think this idea is dead. You cannot get a good representation of how the topology really is from trying to walk nodes using NCP.
The above picture is a good example of the problems. Looking at it from my point of view, MIM, PONDUS, ERSATZ, TARDIS, WXP and JOCKE are all actually sitting one common ethernet. All the lines and seemingly relative locations are just incorrect.
This time, it would appear as if SG1.1 were the bridged ethernet. But the picture does it wrong anyway, since there are no multinet tunnels on the bridge. That would suggest that SG1.1 is some kind of merging of several actual networks, with no real corresponding entity at all.
Johnny
sampsa
On 12 Jan 2013, at 10:45, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
That seems to be more in agreement with what A44RTR sees of Hecnet:
5 areas (9,42,52,59,61) are reachable thru dimma, 4 (18,19,20,33) via SG1 and 3 (3,7,8) via Gorvax.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:07:54
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Mapping - getting close
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:06, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 22:03, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:01, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 21:15, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 21:14, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-01-12 00:37, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Another with some overlap but less horizontal space:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap2.svg
Looks rather weird. I assume PONDUS.637 is actually an attempt at the ethernet bridge, but it don't match reality much.
Also, totally missing some areas, like area 59
And area 9 but Ciscos aren't handled yet. :p
I'm working on that. :)
What's the current plan for solving it?
I'm concurrently attacking it from three different directions: ssh, snmp and mop remote console.
My virtual cisco only supports SSH1. ;)
I probably misconfigured SNMP.
MOP remote console might work! How would I test again?
First one done wins. :)
I'd like to get all three working though for ultimate flexibility.
-brian
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff!
http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet project.
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
No problem at all.
-brian
On Jan 12, 2013, at 8:17, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 12 Jan 2013, at 08:16, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
You need the new walking code. I'll send an email when I'm at my computer next.
Can I have a copy as well? I won't do anything with it, but i'm just curious.
-brian
On Jan 12, 2013, at 7:57, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
That'll have to wait, I'm going to write the whole NCP walking code from scratch, it's getting too messy with my additions to Brian's. But we're very very close.
sampsa
On 12 Jan 2013, at 14:25, Jordi Guillaumes i Pons <jg at jordi.guillaumes.name> wrote:
El 12/01/2013, a les 0:37, sampsa at mac.com va escriure:
Another with some overlap but less horizontal space:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap2.svg
My area (7) is wrong. The Area router is BITXOV (7.60), hooked to SG1 and GORVAX using multinet tunnels. BITXOO is a level 1 router and does not have any out-area circuit (it is defined as a router because it has two virtual DMCs to hook from my laptops when I'm not at home).
I have just tweaked a little bit the routing parameters (now BITXOV has a router priority higher than BITXOO), so perhaps if you scan again you will get a correct picture.
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
jg at jordi.guillaumes.name
HECnet: BITXOV::JGUILLAUMES
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff!
http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet project.
Don't give up hope yet. We are just at the very beginning of this. It shouldn't be hard to figure out Ethernet segments. If a can see more than one router on an interface from show known circ that's pretty much guaranteed to be a bridge and/or local network. The data just needs to be processed and displayed differently. PtP links vs busses.
My new data format should make that a lot easier.
-brian
On Jan 12, 2013, at 8:06, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-01-12 11:41, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Bit more accurate, if messier:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap3.svg
If you ask me, I think this idea is dead. You cannot get a good representation of how the topology really is from trying to walk nodes using NCP.
The above picture is a good example of the problems. Looking at it from my point of view, MIM, PONDUS, ERSATZ, TARDIS, WXP and JOCKE are all actually sitting one common ethernet. All the lines and seemingly relative locations are just incorrect.
This time, it would appear as if SG1.1 were the bridged ethernet. But the picture does it wrong anyway, since there are no multinet tunnels on the bridge. That would suggest that SG1.1 is some kind of merging of several actual networks, with no real corresponding entity at all.
Johnny
sampsa
On 12 Jan 2013, at 10:45, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
That seems to be more in agreement with what A44RTR sees of Hecnet:
5 areas (9,42,52,59,61) are reachable thru dimma, 4 (18,19,20,33) via SG1 and 3 (3,7,8) via Gorvax.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:07:54
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Mapping - getting close
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:06, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 22:03, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:01, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 21:15, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 21:14, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-01-12 00:37, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Another with some overlap but less horizontal space:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap2.svg
Looks rather weird. I assume PONDUS.637 is actually an attempt at the ethernet bridge, but it don't match reality much.
Also, totally missing some areas, like area 59
And area 9 but Ciscos aren't handled yet. :p
I'm working on that. :)
What's the current plan for solving it?
I'm concurrently attacking it from three different directions: ssh, snmp and mop remote console.
My virtual cisco only supports SSH1. ;)
I probably misconfigured SNMP.
MOP remote console might work! How would I test again?
First one done wins. :)
I'd like to get all three working though for ultimate flexibility.
-brian
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff!
http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet project.
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
Johnny, that's just an example graph - we have all the links etc collected as CSV too, which can be manipulated etc.
Admittedly the bridge adds some weirdness to this all, if everything was multinet then the walk would be easy :)
sampsa
On 12 Jan 2013, at 15:06, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-01-12 11:41, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Bit more accurate, if messier:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap3.svg
If you ask me, I think this idea is dead. You cannot get a good representation of how the topology really is from trying to walk nodes using NCP.
The above picture is a good example of the problems. Looking at it from my point of view, MIM, PONDUS, ERSATZ, TARDIS, WXP and JOCKE are all actually sitting one common ethernet. All the lines and seemingly relative locations are just incorrect.
This time, it would appear as if SG1.1 were the bridged ethernet. But the picture does it wrong anyway, since there are no multinet tunnels on the bridge. That would suggest that SG1.1 is some kind of merging of several actual networks, with no real corresponding entity at all.
Johnny
sampsa
On 12 Jan 2013, at 10:45, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
That seems to be more in agreement with what A44RTR sees of Hecnet:
5 areas (9,42,52,59,61) are reachable thru dimma, 4 (18,19,20,33) via SG1 and 3 (3,7,8) via Gorvax.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:07:54
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] Mapping - getting close
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:06, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 22:03, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:01, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
On Jan 11, 2013, at 21:15, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
On 11 Jan 2013, at 21:14, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
On 2013-01-12 00:37, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
Another with some overlap but less horizontal space:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap2.svg
Looks rather weird. I assume PONDUS.637 is actually an attempt at the ethernet bridge, but it don't match reality much.
Also, totally missing some areas, like area 59
And area 9 but Ciscos aren't handled yet. :p
I'm working on that. :)
What's the current plan for solving it?
I'm concurrently attacking it from three different directions: ssh, snmp and mop remote console.
My virtual cisco only supports SSH1. ;)
I probably misconfigured SNMP.
MOP remote console might work! How would I test again?
First one done wins. :)
I'd like to get all three working though for ultimate flexibility.
-brian
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff!
http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet project.
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
On 12 Jan 2013, at 08:16, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote:
You need the new walking code. I'll send an email when I'm at my computer next.
Can I have a copy as well? I won't do anything with it, but i'm just curious.
-brian
On Jan 12, 2013, at 7:57, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
That'll have to wait, I'm going to write the whole NCP walking code from scratch, it's getting too messy with my additions to Brian's. But we're very very close.
sampsa
On 12 Jan 2013, at 14:25, Jordi Guillaumes i Pons <jg at jordi.guillaumes.name> wrote:
El 12/01/2013, a les 0:37, sampsa at mac.com va escriure:
Another with some overlap but less horizontal space:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap2.svg
My area (7) is wrong. The Area router is BITXOV (7.60), hooked to SG1 and GORVAX using multinet tunnels. BITXOO is a level 1 router and does not have any out-area circuit (it is defined as a router because it has two virtual DMCs to hook from my laptops when I'm not at home).
I have just tweaked a little bit the routing parameters (now BITXOV has a router priority higher than BITXOO), so perhaps if you scan again you will get a correct picture.
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
jg at jordi.guillaumes.name
HECnet: BITXOV::JGUILLAUMES
--
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff!
http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet project.
You need the new walking code. I'll send an email when I'm at my computer next.
-brian
On Jan 12, 2013, at 7:57, sampsa at mac.com wrote:
That'll have to wait, I'm going to write the whole NCP walking code from scratch, it's getting too messy with my additions to Brian's. But we're very very close.
sampsa
On 12 Jan 2013, at 14:25, Jordi Guillaumes i Pons <jg at jordi.guillaumes.name> wrote:
El 12/01/2013, a les 0:37, sampsa at mac.com va escriure:
Another with some overlap but less horizontal space:
http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap2.svg
My area (7) is wrong. The Area router is BITXOV (7.60), hooked to SG1 and GORVAX using multinet tunnels. BITXOO is a level 1 router and does not have any out-area circuit (it is defined as a router because it has two virtual DMCs to hook from my laptops when I'm not at home).
I have just tweaked a little bit the routing parameters (now BITXOV has a router priority higher than BITXOO), so perhaps if you scan again you will get a correct picture.
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
jg at jordi.guillaumes.name
HECnet: BITXOV::JGUILLAUMES
