VSP 7200 7.1 - RFC3021
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎03-25-2019 11:51 PM
Does VSP release 7.1 support RFC 3012 - /31 subnet mask.
This is ideal for vIST links and would greatly enable configuration consistency
This is ideal for vIST links and would greatly enable configuration consistency
3 REPLIES 3
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎03-28-2019 08:53 PM
I see what you mean now. Thanks for your explanation.
I do not know if this is a VOSS limitation or a Broadcom ASIC limitation. While doing some google'ing it would appear that not every vendor supports this, and some vendors don't support it across their entire portfolio.
I recommend contacting your local Extreme SE and perhaps open a ticket with GTAC so we can track the feature.
I do not know if this is a VOSS limitation or a Broadcom ASIC limitation. While doing some google'ing it would appear that not every vendor supports this, and some vendors don't support it across their entire portfolio.
I recommend contacting your local Extreme SE and perhaps open a ticket with GTAC so we can track the feature.
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎03-26-2019 12:53 PM
When we set up an SPB network, we aim to be consistent with various settings, for instance:
CLIP: 10.10.10.1
MEPID: 1
SPBM Nick: B.E0.01
And so on for .2, .3, .4, etc.
With a /31 mask, we could carry that forward to the vIST as well, which we can't do with a /30.
with a /30, we can have .1 and .2, but the next pair would have to be .5 and .6, instead of .3 and .4, etc.
CLIP: 10.10.10.1
MEPID: 1
SPBM Nick: B.E0.01
And so on for .2, .3, .4, etc.
With a /31 mask, we could carry that forward to the vIST as well, which we can't do with a /30.
with a /30, we can have .1 and .2, but the next pair would have to be .5 and .6, instead of .3 and .4, etc.
Options
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Get Direct Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
‎03-26-2019 02:21 AM
Hi @Constantine Romanos Thanks for contributing.
great question. ..... I heard about this a few years ago. /31 is a slick little subnetting trick.
I was asked this a few years ago and It would appear that VOSS 7.1 or 8.0 does not support RFC 3021.
and I just double checked the factsheets tonight.
But It was only a proposed standard. not a true standard, thus hard to justify to adoption. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3021
I don't argue that it would be a "nice to have" feature. I would reach out to your local Extreme sales team and inquire about a possible feature request.
I am curious to know your thoughts on how it would enable "Configuration Consistency". I have many large customers, 20,000- to 30,000 user networks. thousands of devices.....they have used /30's for their iST's and vIST's with no issues. IPv4 addresses are cheap.
great question. ..... I heard about this a few years ago. /31 is a slick little subnetting trick.
I was asked this a few years ago and It would appear that VOSS 7.1 or 8.0 does not support RFC 3021.
and I just double checked the factsheets tonight.
But It was only a proposed standard. not a true standard, thus hard to justify to adoption. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3021
I don't argue that it would be a "nice to have" feature. I would reach out to your local Extreme sales team and inquire about a possible feature request.
I am curious to know your thoughts on how it would enable "Configuration Consistency". I have many large customers, 20,000- to 30,000 user networks. thousands of devices.....they have used /30's for their iST's and vIST's with no issues. IPv4 addresses are cheap.
