ntacpeering - Re: Viability of a P&R FTW
Subject: NTAC Peering Working Group
List archive
- From: Nick Buraglio <>
- To: "Spears, Christopher M." <>
- Cc: "" <>
- Subject: Re: Viability of a P&R FTW
- Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 13:56:53 -0700
This has the potential to be a really useful offering and has the side benefit of bringing together a subset of folks doing similar things that are able to bounce ideas off of each other over time.
nb
---
Nick Buraglio
ESnet Network Engineering Group (AS293)
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
+1 (510) 995-6068
Nick Buraglio
ESnet Network Engineering Group (AS293)
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
+1 (510) 995-6068
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 7:05 AM, Spears, Christopher M. <> wrote:
Hello Group,
Exploring the potential for a FTW on Peering & Routing, I’ve come up with the following outline for the curriculum. On a broad level, I’d like to simply assess consensus on the viability of a such a workshop. If there’s either insufficient demand or content, then it may not be worth the effort to put on. If there is interest, then I’d like to solicit comments or proposed changes from the group.
Overview of Internet2 layer-3 services
- services, support structures
- topologies, differences, similarities
- routing policy of each service
Interdomain Routing 201
- Not a primer on BGP (i.e. 101)
- Best (and permissible) practices
Utilizing provided policy levers
- traffic engineering using BGP communities, MED
- impact of NET+
- managing asymmetry
Internet2 Tools:
- Router-proxy
- SNAPP
- Deepfield (w/NDA)
Other tools:
- route-views, peeringdb.com
- RADb, IRR, RDAP
- flow data, snmp
- on-net cache/appliance
Pulling it together
- Analyzing and classifying traffic to identify your needs
- Generating & implementing policy for your institution(s)
- Applying more broadly to your downstream members/customers
Future:
- Identify Peering Service blind-spots
- What additional tools and reporting would be useful?
- How to improve services or features?
This would be heavily focused on making sure connectors can fully leverage their Layer-3 services from Internet2, but would also impress ways to make policy choices applicable within their own networks. This would not be an introduction to inter-domain routing, BGP 101, etc. The prerequisites would be familiarity with BGP, knowledge of how your organization connects to Internet2 and the Peering Service, and being in a position to effect change.
Glad to discuss on-list, off-list, or on the next P&R WG call.
Regards,
Chris
- Viability of a P&R FTW, Spears, Christopher M., 08/18/2015
- Re: Viability of a P&R FTW, Michael H Lambert, 08/18/2015
- Re: Viability of a P&R FTW, Matthew J Zekauskas, 08/18/2015
- Re: Viability of a P&R FTW, Spears, Christopher M., 08/18/2015
- Re: Viability of a P&R FTW, Ryan Nobrega, 08/18/2015
- Re: Viability of a P&R FTW, Rob Vietzke, 08/19/2015
- Message not available
- Deepfield/Netflow, Michael H Lambert, 08/19/2015
- Message not available
- Re: Viability of a P&R FTW, Spears, Christopher M., 08/18/2015
- Re: Viability of a P&R FTW, Matthew J Zekauskas, 08/18/2015
- Re: Viability of a P&R FTW, Nick Buraglio, 08/18/2015
- Re: Viability of a P&R FTW, Michael H Lambert, 08/18/2015
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.