[ixpmanager] Peering Manager question

[Barry O'Donovan]

On 19/11/2014 07:23, Brian Thompson wrote:
> We have sflow and p2p working it is awesome and our member love it.  We
> just had our second annual board meeting for NWAX.  So we have a fresh
> excitement about IXP Manager and getting more features working.

Great!

> I did just do a search for that script and I don't have a copy of it
> with the latest clone from github.

Nope, it's not there. I've poked Nick so he'll take a look and polish 
and add. Note it's just after 7AM here so it may be a few hours ;-)

> How does INEX handle lag ports?  I know we are small, but Netflix is
> adding their third 10Gig port and Google adding their second.  This data
> is still missing from p2p.
>
> https://github.com/inex/IXP-Manager/issues/126

We have a lot of LAG ports and they 'just work' (tm) for us. First off, 
from a schema / database point of view, you:

  - create a single virtual interface
  - add multiple physical interfaces to this virtual interface

Apologies if this is teaching you to suck eggs but I just want to be clear:

When you 'Provision new port...' (i.e. use the 'Add Interface Wizard') 
it assumes a single port. To add a second (or more) physical interface, 
find your member, open the Ports tab and click the edit icon. Then click 
the add icon next to 'Physical Interfaces'.

When you do this, MRTG should work fine. That means you should get:

  - individual MRTG traffic graphs for each individual interface;
  - as of v3.6.15, you should get aggregate LAG graphs showing the total 
traffic over all ports in the LAG;
  - aggregate graph for all ports for that member.


Peer to peer graphs in general should work as the p2p mechanism tracks 
traffic between MAC addresses and LAGs present with a single MAC. In 
general.

Now, that's "in general". As #126 states: At the moment, there is no 
support for handling LAGs at an interface level. LAGs only work on kit 
that doesn't use pseudointerfaces for the ethernet bundle.

This means Juniper EX series if I recall correctly.

Now #126 is not top of our list because:

  - we have no kit that uses pseudointerfaces so no way to develop / test
  - a corollary of that is that it's not an itch we need to scratch :-(

We're about to start a fork lift upgrade of one of our peering LANs to 
Extreme kit. But I suspect that also don't use pseudointerfaces.

If someone can arrange access to their IXP Manager installation with 
snmp read access to a switch, that would certainly help move this along. 
How much work is involved here will determine when it gets done. We're 
pretty busy this side of Christmas so if it's more than a few hours, 
it'll realistically be the new year.

  - Barry