Throughout my career as a network engineer, I’ve heard lots of comparisons to emergency responders thrown around to describe what the networking team does. Sometimes we’re the network police that bust offenders of bandwidth polices. Other times there is the Network SWAT Team that fixes things that get broken when no one else can get the job done. But over and over again I hear network admins and engineers called “fire fighters”. I think it’s time to change how we look at the job of fires on the network.
The president of my old company used to try to motivate us to think beyond our current job roles by saying, “We need to stop being firefighters.” It was absolutely true. However, the sentiment lacked some of the important details of what exactly a modern network professional actually does.
Think about your job. You spend most of your time implementing change requests and trying to fix things that don’t go according to plan. Or figuring out why a change six months ago suddenly decided today to create a routing loop. And every problem you encounter is a huge one that requires an “all hands on deck” mentality Continue reading
OVSDB, OpenStack Neutron, and OpenDaylight Lithium are all on the menu.
Original content from Roger's CCIE Blog Tracking the journey towards getting the ultimate Cisco Certification. The Routing & Switching Lab Exam
During my CCIE journey I have used many online resources from paid to free, the list below shows my top 10 ccie related websites that I used on a regular basis to to get information and study material. These range from Cisco to training providers and personal blogs. All which provided benefits to my study. […]
Post taken from CCIE Blog
Original post 10 Websites To Visit If You Want to be a CCIE
Define "Security Blanket Failure"
The post Network Dictionary – Security Blanket Failure appeared first on EtherealMind.
One of my kids recently asked me whether I plan to travel somewhere during the autumn. The answer was “a bit” surprising: Boston (just got back), Zurich, Bern, Stockholm, Ljubljana, Heidelberg, Nuremberg, Rome, Miami, Ljubljana, Helsinki, and maybe Munich and/or another trip to Zurich… so I might not be able to blog as frequently as usual.
Most of those trips are public events (hyperlinked). If you’re anywhere close one of those cities, check them out and drop by.
Let’s assume we have a Branch with 1 Router and 2 WAN connections. We decide to use Intelligent Path Control with PfRv3 and design our policy such that the business critical traffic goes over one of the WAN clouds (MPLS, for example) and will use the other WAN cloud (Internet, for example) should a certain level of impairment (delay, loss, jitter) occur on the primary path.
But that business critical traffic is well….. critical to your business. So that probably isn’t really good enough. Let’s take this a couple steps further to make sure your business critical traffic is treated as such.
With Intelligent Path Control with PfRv3 what will actually happen is that while the business critical traffic is going over the primary channel, a backup channel will be created over the other WAN cloud. On top of that, PfRv3 will be checking the health of the path the backup channel is taking. Actually… let me be even more specific. PfRv3 will be checking the health of the exact path that business critical traffic would take if it were to be sent over the fallback WAN cloud.
“How is this accomplished?
Regardless of hashing algorithms Continue reading
NFV must move beyond that familiar, ubiquitous ETSI diagram.
The hosting firm's security tools start reaching into Azure, with other clouds to follow.
Software Defined Networking, and it’s latest incarnation SD-WAN seem to be all the rage at the moment. Having seen presentations from vendors large and small on the subject recently at Networking Field Day 10 I am still given to thinking there are a few things that get glossed-over by the vendors quite often. Foremost in my mind, is this (potentially heretical thought):
It is all very well creating virtual or ‘overlay’ networks which run over other networks to suit your purposes, but as someone famous once said, you can’t change the laws of physics. Packets must ultimately flow across a medium – wires, fibres or waves. The media doesn’t give a flying fart whether the packet is naked, or clothed in layers of MPLS or GRE headers – if that medium is congested and doesn’t support any form of packet prioritisation, your data is down the dunny.
There’s a trade-off here that perhaps not many people understand when they are shown smooth presentations by manufacturers. It seems to me that:
Software Defined Networking, and it’s latest incarnation SD-WAN seem to be all the rage at the moment. Having seen presentations from vendors large and small on the subject recently at Networking Field Day 10 I am still given to thinking there are a few things that get glossed-over by the vendors quite often. Foremost in my mind, is this (potentially heretical thought):
It is all very well creating virtual or ‘overlay’ networks which run over other networks to suit your purposes, but as someone famous once said, you can’t change the laws of physics. Packets must ultimately flow across a medium – wires, fibres or waves. The media doesn’t give a flying fart whether the packet is naked, or clothed in layers MPLS or GRE headers – if that medium is congested and doesn’t support any form of packet prioritisation, your data is down the dunny.
There’s a trade-off here that perhaps not many people understand when they are shown smooth presentations by manufacturers. It seems to me that: