nanog mailing list archives

Re: Viability of GNS3 network simulation for testing features/configurations.


From: Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 12:08:34 -0400


Said that I haven’t played with GNS3, EVE-NG, VIRL,… recently so I don’t
know if any of these would allow me to create these massive “spreadsheets”
for programmatic generation of labs.


 GNS3 you can, they have a fairly well documented JSON based API that you
can use to script up all the things, connections, and visual layout as
well.

I've only played with it on a rudimentary level, but it seems to work
just fine.

On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 8:14 AM <adamv0025 () netconsultings com> wrote:

I’ve been using network simulation well before GNS3 was around using
dynamips - and even when GNS3 came along it was still not good -since it
just couldn’t handle the scale (~40nodes) (not on my compute resources at
that time anyways).



And similarly nowadays in the era of proper HW simulation through VMs
(though I miss the idle-pc), I really like virsh/libvirt along with OVS as
it allows me to programmatically generate the VM files (xmls, images,
etc..) and define the topology in OVS (talking hundreds of links) which
would be otherwise really tedious to draw by hand.

Also spinning up a big virtual lab from scratch takes several hours (of
pure compute time) so it’s better to have some meshing in between the nodes
and just spin up arbitrary L1 topologies on demand rather than spinning up
the VMs every time one needs to load a different topology.

Said that I haven’t played with GNS3, EVE-NG, VIRL,… recently so I don’t
know if any of these would allow me to create these massive “spreadsheets”
for programmatic generation of labs.



Best approach is to have at least two virtual environments

1) closely resembling production environment -this is where designers and
Ops people can test day to day operational changes etc..

2) environment where architects can test strategic/evolution changes to
the network infrastructure, new concepts and big migration/integration
projects, etc…



What is it good for:

Testing design concepts

-this is one of the biggest advantages of virtual testing

Physical labs as we all know cost a small fortune and you can simulate
just a small cross-sections of your overall topology at a time  -but in
virtual lab depending on your computing resources and depending on what you
need to test you can either simulate very large sections or complete
network (at lower resolution) or smaller sections with very high resolution
or combination of both.

This allows you to really see what happens to your traffic patterns and
assess the impact of your design changes from small to large scales.



What is it not good for:

A) Scale testing

i.e. how many bgp/bfd/vrrp/etc.. sessions how many routes/VRFs/etc… - you
need the actual HW resources to carry out these tests

B) Performance testing

How much pps I can drive through NPU with these features
(QOS,filters,etc…) what are the failover times, (fast reroute, fabric
fail,RE fail, etc…) -again you need the actual HW that will be used in
production to measure these



But as you can see A) and B) can easily be tested with a single DUT (or
some small topology around it) using actual HW plugged in a loop with
IXIA/Spirent testers.



adam



*From:* NANOG <nanog-bounces () nanog org> *On Behalf Of *Ryland Kremeier
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 16, 2019 4:31 PM
*To:* <nanog () nanog org> <nanog () nanog org>
*Subject:* Viability of GNS3 network simulation for testing
features/configurations.



Hello,



I’m currently in the process of setting up a near identical network to our
own in GNS3 for testing purposes. Has anyone here tried this before to any
success? We need to buy the Cisco IOSv image to continue with the sim so I
figured I would inquire here first before diving in.



All info is appreciated,

--

Ryland Kremeier


Current thread: