nanog mailing list archives
Re: Switch for SFP+
From: Josh Baird <joshbaird () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 17:57:32 -0400
LACP+tagged VLANs is not a problem for me on RouterOS. I'm not wasting my time on SwOS. In general, Mikrotik's L2 switching implementation is very frustrating, but I think it's gotten a bit better on the CRS3XX series of switches. On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 5:53 PM Randy Carpenter <rcarpen () network1 net> wrote:
I could never get LACP + tagged VLANs to work on SwOS. Then again, it doesn't work reliably on RouterOS either, so I gave up. Spending more on hardware that is well supported is worth it versus my time and sanity. I think Ubiquiti pretty much has the "cheap hardware that works well, but commercial support lacking" market cornered. thanks, -Randy ----- On May 18, 2020, at 5:43 PM, nanog <nanog () nanog org> wrote: Yep, run SwichOS, prevents you from running things in software. š *[image: LTI-Full_175px]* *Dennis Burgess, Mikrotik Certified Trainer MTCNA, MTCRE, MTCWE, MTCTCE, MTCINE, MTCSE, HE IPv6 Sage, Cambium ePMP Certified * Author of "Learn RouterOS- Second Editionā *Link Technologies, Inc* -- Mikrotik & WISP Support Services *Office*: 314-735-0270 Website: http://www.linktechs.net Create Wireless Coverageās with www.towercoverage.com *From:* NANOG <nanog-bounces () nanog org> *On Behalf Of *Mike Hammett *Sent:* Monday, May 18, 2020 4:37 PM *To:* Mauro Gasparini <mjgasparini () gmail com> *Cc:* nanog () nanog org *Subject:* Re: Switch for SFP+ That's a downfall of Mikrotik, they give you ultimate power. You can do some pretty atypical things on there. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions <https://imsva91-ctp.trendmicro.com:443/wis/clicktime/v1/query?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.ics%2dil.com&umid=B47E9451-A5F3-0D05-8BDE-9FDBD4B4C161&auth=079c058f437b7c6303d36c6513e5e8848d0c5ac4-285b59a47041a35803b05fa3a991e89443b374c5> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> ------------------------------ *From: *"Mauro Gasparini" <mjgasparini () gmail com> *To: *nanog () nanog org *Sent: *Monday, May 18, 2020 1:45:59 PM *Subject: *Re: Switch for SFP+ It's clear then that I must use "bridge vlan" to achieve the goal I am looking for. Now it's time for me to study, research and test on my side. If I have any specific questions, I will draw on your experience. Thanks a lot. El 15/5/20 a las 22:11, Travis Garrison escribiĆ³: On the CRS 3xx line, use vlan filtering instead. This guarantees hardware offloading. PS. Do not use this method on the 1xx or 2xx lines. /interface bonding add mode=802.3ad name=bond-inet slaves=ether9,ether10,ether8 transmit-hash-policy=layer-2-and-3 /interface bridge add name=bridge vlan-filtering=yes /interface bridge port add bridge=bridge interface=bond-inet add bridge=bridge interface=sfp1 /interface bridge vlan add bridge=bridge tagged=bond-inet,sfp1 vlan-ids=201 Thanks Travis *From:* NANOG <nanog-bounces () nanog org> <nanog-bounces () nanog org> *On Behalf Of *Mauro Gasparini *Sent:* Friday, May 15, 2020 10:55 AM *To:* nanog () nanog org *Subject:* Re: Switch for SFP+ This works well on my CRSs: /interface bonding add mode=802.3ad name=bond-inet slaves=ether9,ether10,ether8 transmit-hash-policy=layer-2-and-3 /interface bridge port add bridge=br-cabase interface=bond-inet add bridge=br-cabase interface=sfp1 But if I want to bridge vlans behind some bonding Instead of bridging phy interfaces, cpu explodes: /interface vlan add name=vl201-mmen vlan-id=201 interface=sfp1 add name=vl201-mment vlan-id=201 interface=bond-inet /interface bridge port add bridge=br-mment interface=vl201-mmen add bridge=br-mment interface=vl201-mment El 15/5/20 a las 12:06, Mike Hammett escribiĆ³: https://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:CRS3xx_series_switches#Bonding ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions <https://imsva91-ctp.trendmicro.com:443/wis/clicktime/v1/query?url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.ics%2dil.com&umid=B47E9451-A5F3-0D05-8BDE-9FDBD4B4C161&auth=079c058f437b7c6303d36c6513e5e8848d0c5ac4-285b59a47041a35803b05fa3a991e89443b374c5> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> ------------------------------ *From: *"Mauro Gasparini" <mjgasparini () gmail com> <mjgasparini () gmail com> *To: *nanog () nanog org *Sent: *Friday, May 15, 2020 8:55:22 AM *Subject: *Re: Switch for SFP+ Thanks. I am currently using CRS326-24G-2S+ (with routerOS) for this, but when I want to do vlan trunking through the bonding, cpu load grows from 3% to more than 90%. I'm consulting Mikrotik's support in the meantime, because routerOS probably doesn't take advantage of the switch hardware as swOS would. El 15/5/20 a las 10:03, Alain Hebert escribiĆ³: Hi, Mikrotik is a decent product and I'm always amazed at their features set, but... Using the UI to configuring the switch will punt too much traffic toward the CPU. However, it is possible to configure the switch fabric with the cli and attain the desired results. It does not compare to a JNP QFX5100 or a Extreme Network x650, x670... etc. ----- Alain Hebert ahebert () pubnix net PubNIX Inc. 50 boul. St-Charles P.O. Box 26770 Beaconsfield, Quebec H9W 6G7 Tel: 514-990-5911 http://www.pubnix.net Fax: 514-990-9443 On 2020-05-14 15:11, Adam Thompson wrote: Have you actually looked at Mikrotik switches? I don't like the OS, but the hardware does what you want it to. https://mikrotik.com/products/group/switches?filter&s=c&r={%22sfp_plus_interface%22:{%22s%22:%223%22,%22e%22:%2224%22}}#! <https://mikrotik.com/products/group/switches?filter&s=c&r=%7b%22sfp_plus_interface%22:%7b%22s%22:%223%22,%22e%22:%2224%22%7d%7d#!> If necessary, buy your SFP modules from FS.com and get them coded as Mikrotik modules at the factory - that's what we do for Cisco, Brocade, Juniper, Extreme, etc. Even the top-of-the-line Mikrotik only costs US$899. -Adam *Adam Thompson* Consultant, Infrastructure Services [image: [MERLIN LOGO]] 100 - 135 Innovation Drive Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8 (204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only) athompson () merlin mb ca www.merlin.mb.ca ------------------------------ *From:* NANOG <nanog-bounces () nanog org> <nanog-bounces () nanog org> on behalf of Mauro Gasparini <mjgasparini () gmail com> <mjgasparini () gmail com> *Sent:* Thursday, May 14, 2020 8:46:21 AM *To:* Mehmet Akcin *Cc:* nanog *Subject:* Re: Switch for SFP+ Thank you. The problem is that to get a price lower than U$D 3000 I have to resort to a used device. El 14/5/20 a las 01:08, Mehmet Akcin escribiĆ³: Used Juniper QFX5100-48T will do it. Probably overkill but you can grab one cheap @ebay On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 16:36 Mauro Gasparini <mjgasparini () gmail com> wrote: Good afternoon. I'm looking for a switch with the following capabilities: . transport for more than 20 gbps . link aggregation LACP . slots for SFP+ . seamlessly when trunking vlans through the link aggregation. And essentially that doesn't exceed US$D 2000 and is compatible with 10GBASE-ER and/or 10GBASE-ZR modules that are not from the vendor itself (e.g. SPFs: Huawei, Mikrotik, Sumitomo, OEMs). If any of you have a good experience with a device that meets these requirements (which are minimal with the exception of price and compatibility) ? Regards. Mauro Gasparini -- Mehmet +1-424-298-1903
Current thread:
- Re: Switch for SFP+, (continued)
- Re: Switch for SFP+ Adam Thompson (May 14)
- Re: Switch for SFP+ Alain Hebert (May 15)
- Re: Switch for SFP+ Mauro Gasparini (May 15)
- Re: Switch for SFP+ Mike Hammett (May 15)
- Re: Switch for SFP+ Mauro Gasparini (May 15)
- RE: Switch for SFP+ Travis Garrison (May 18)
- Re: Switch for SFP+ Mauro Gasparini (May 18)
- Re: Switch for SFP+ Mike Hammett (May 18)
- RE: Switch for SFP+ Dennis Burgess via NANOG (May 18)
- Re: Switch for SFP+ Randy Carpenter (May 18)
- Re: Switch for SFP+ Josh Baird (May 18)
- Re: Switch for SFP+ Mike Hammett (May 15)
- Re: Switch for SFP+ Mauro Gasparini (May 15)
- RE: Switch for SFP+ nathanb (May 14)
- Re: Switch for SFP+ Mauro Gasparini (May 15)