Mailing List Archive

Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
Hi,



Has anyone any idea where Bandwidth figures are got from?



Are they picked up at an ATM level? i.e Why do the two examples below
differ?



Any help appreciated.



Thanks

Mark



sh int Vi8098

Virtual-Access8098 is up, line protocol is up

Hardware is Virtual Access interface

Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)

MTU 1500 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec



sh int Vi8518

Virtual-Access8518 is up, line protocol is up

Hardware is Virtual Access interface

Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)

MTU 1500 bytes, BW 565 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,

reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload
RE: Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces [ In reply to ]
Mark,

VAI bandwidth is usually picked up from a lower layer (ATM, ISDN, L2TP),
really depends what this Interface is bound to (ATM vc, PPPoE,
L2TP/PPPoVPDN, ISDN, etc.))..

oli

P.S: "Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)",
the "removed" doesn't sound right..

Mark Tohill <> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 5:48 PM:

> Hi,
>
> Has anyone any idea where Bandwidth figures are got from?
>
> Are they picked up at an ATM level? i.e Why do the two examples below
> differ?
>
> Any help appreciated.
>
> sh int Vi8098
>
> Virtual-Access8098 is up, line protocol is up
>
> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>
> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>
> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec
>
>
>
> sh int Vi8518
>
> Virtual-Access8518 is up, line protocol is up
>
> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>
> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>
> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 565 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,
>
> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload
RE: RE: Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces [ In reply to ]
So you terminate L2TP sessions? Then it's the LAC's connect-speed which
is sent during ICRQ as L2TP AVP. You have no control over it on the
LNS..

oli

Mark Tohill <> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 6:13 PM:

> Apologies,
>
> Replied to digest and removed subject....
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Tohill
> Sent: 06 July 2005 17:11
> To: 'cisco-bba@puck.nether.net'
> Subject: RE:[cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
>
> Sorry, Oliver
>
> I removed that Loopback IP! (paranoia in family for years)
>
> .
> .
> .
>
> no vpdn history failure cause normal
> vpdn history failure table-size 50
> vpdn session-limit 16000
> vpdn ip udp ignore checksum
> !
> vpdn-group 1
> description VPDN-GROUP-1
> accept-dialin
> protocol l2tp
> virtual-template 1
> terminate-from hostname <removed>
> source-ip <removed>
> lcp renegotiation on-mismatch
> l2tp tunnel password <removed>
> !
> virtual-template 1 pre-clone 8000
> !
>
> interface ATM1/0.101 point-to-point
> description Fibre 1
> bandwidth 74880
> ip address <removed>
> pvc 101/35
> vbr-nrt 74880 74880 290
> oam-pvc manage
> oam retry 2 2 2
> encapsulation aal5snap
> !
> !
> interface ATM1/0.201 point-to-point
> description Fibre 2
> bandwidth 74880
> ip address <removed>
> pvc 201/35
> vbr-nrt 74880 74880 290
> oam-pvc manage
> oam retry 2 2 2
> encapsulation aal5snap
>
>
> interface Virtual-Template1
> description Virtual-Template
> ip unnumbered Loopback0
> ip tcp adjust-mss 1420
> ip mroute-cache
> no logging event link-status
> load-interval 30
> no snmp trap link-status
> ntp disable
> peer default ip address pool dp01 dp02 dp03 dp04 dp05 dp06 dp07 dp08
> dp09
> dp10 dp11 dp12 dp13 dp14 dp15 dp16 dp17 dp18 dp19
> keepalive 100
> ppp authentication chap
>
>
> Mark
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> cisco-bba-request@puck.nether.net
> Sent: 06 July 2005 17:00
> To: cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> Subject: cisco-bba Digest, Vol 26, Issue 2
>
> Send cisco-bba mailing list submissions to
> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cisco-bba-request@puck.nether.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cisco-bba-owner@puck.nether.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of cisco-bba digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces (Mark Tohill)
> 2. RE: Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
> (Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer))
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 16:47:59 +0100
> From: "Mark Tohill" <Mark@u.tv>
> Subject: [cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
> To: <cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
> Message-ID:
> <658F94741F4A8A4F94171E37E417488B0A316B@UTVEXCHANGE.utv.local>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Has anyone any idea where Bandwidth figures are got from?
>
>
>
> Are they picked up at an ATM level? i.e Why do the two examples below
> differ?
>
>
>
> Any help appreciated.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> sh int Vi8098
>
> Virtual-Access8098 is up, line protocol is up
>
> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>
> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>
> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec
>
>
>
> sh int Vi8518
>
> Virtual-Access8518 is up, line protocol is up
>
> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>
> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>
> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 565 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,
>
> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-bba/attachments/20050706/a6a07d1
> 3/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 17:55:22 +0200
> From: "Oliver Boehmer \(oboehmer\)" <oboehmer@cisco.com>
> Subject: RE: [cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
> To: "Mark Tohill" <Mark@u.tv>, <cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
> Message-ID:
>
> <70B7A1CCBFA5C649BD562B6D9F7ED784DD71E4@xmb-ams-333.emea.cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Mark,
>
> VAI bandwidth is usually picked up from a lower layer (ATM, ISDN,
> L2TP), really depends what this Interface is bound to (ATM vc, PPPoE,
> L2TP/PPPoVPDN, ISDN, etc.))..
>
> oli
>
> P.S: "Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)",
> the "removed" doesn't sound right..
>
> Mark Tohill <> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 5:48 PM:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Has anyone any idea where Bandwidth figures are got from?
>>
>> Are they picked up at an ATM level? i.e Why do the two examples
>> below differ?
>>
>> Any help appreciated.
>>
>> sh int Vi8098
>>
>> Virtual-Access8098 is up, line protocol is up
>>
>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>>
>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>>
>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec
>>
>>
>>
>> sh int Vi8518
>>
>> Virtual-Access8518 is up, line protocol is up
>>
>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>>
>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>>
>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 565 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,
>>
>> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-bba mailing list
> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>
>
> End of cisco-bba Digest, Vol 26, Issue 2
> ****************************************
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-bba mailing list
> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
Re: Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces [ In reply to ]
You can always set the bandwidth from radius for the virtual-access.

Cheers,
Nigel

On 07/07/2005, at 2:26 AM, Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) wrote:

> So you terminate L2TP sessions? Then it's the LAC's connect-speed
> which
> is sent during ICRQ as L2TP AVP. You have no control over it on the
> LNS..
>
> oli
>
> Mark Tohill <> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 6:13 PM:
>
>
>> Apologies,
>>
>> Replied to digest and removed subject....
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mark Tohill
>> Sent: 06 July 2005 17:11
>> To: 'cisco-bba@puck.nether.net'
>> Subject: RE:[cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
>>
>> Sorry, Oliver
>>
>> I removed that Loopback IP! (paranoia in family for years)
>>
>> .
>> .
>> .
>>
>> no vpdn history failure cause normal
>> vpdn history failure table-size 50
>> vpdn session-limit 16000
>> vpdn ip udp ignore checksum
>> !
>> vpdn-group 1
>> description VPDN-GROUP-1
>> accept-dialin
>> protocol l2tp
>> virtual-template 1
>> terminate-from hostname <removed>
>> source-ip <removed>
>> lcp renegotiation on-mismatch
>> l2tp tunnel password <removed>
>> !
>> virtual-template 1 pre-clone 8000
>> !
>>
>> interface ATM1/0.101 point-to-point
>> description Fibre 1
>> bandwidth 74880
>> ip address <removed>
>> pvc 101/35
>> vbr-nrt 74880 74880 290
>> oam-pvc manage
>> oam retry 2 2 2
>> encapsulation aal5snap
>> !
>> !
>> interface ATM1/0.201 point-to-point
>> description Fibre 2
>> bandwidth 74880
>> ip address <removed>
>> pvc 201/35
>> vbr-nrt 74880 74880 290
>> oam-pvc manage
>> oam retry 2 2 2
>> encapsulation aal5snap
>>
>>
>> interface Virtual-Template1
>> description Virtual-Template
>> ip unnumbered Loopback0
>> ip tcp adjust-mss 1420
>> ip mroute-cache
>> no logging event link-status
>> load-interval 30
>> no snmp trap link-status
>> ntp disable
>> peer default ip address pool dp01 dp02 dp03 dp04 dp05 dp06 dp07 dp08
>> dp09
>> dp10 dp11 dp12 dp13 dp14 dp15 dp16 dp17 dp18 dp19
>> keepalive 100
>> ppp authentication chap
>>
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net
>> [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
>> cisco-bba-request@puck.nether.net
>> Sent: 06 July 2005 17:00
>> To: cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
>> Subject: cisco-bba Digest, Vol 26, Issue 2
>>
>> Send cisco-bba mailing list submissions to
>> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> cisco-bba-request@puck.nether.net
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> cisco-bba-owner@puck.nether.net
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of cisco-bba digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces (Mark Tohill)
>> 2. RE: Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
>> (Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer))
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 16:47:59 +0100
>> From: "Mark Tohill" <Mark@u.tv>
>> Subject: [cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
>> To: <cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
>> Message-ID:
>> <658F94741F4A8A4F94171E37E417488B0A316B@UTVEXCHANGE.utv.local>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> Has anyone any idea where Bandwidth figures are got from?
>>
>>
>>
>> Are they picked up at an ATM level? i.e Why do the two examples below
>> differ?
>>
>>
>>
>> Any help appreciated.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>> sh int Vi8098
>>
>> Virtual-Access8098 is up, line protocol is up
>>
>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>>
>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>>
>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec
>>
>>
>>
>> sh int Vi8518
>>
>> Virtual-Access8518 is up, line protocol is up
>>
>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>>
>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>>
>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 565 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,
>>
>> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL:
>>
>>
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-bba/attachments/20050706/
> a6a07d1
>
>> 3/attachment-0001.html
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 17:55:22 +0200
>> From: "Oliver Boehmer \(oboehmer\)" <oboehmer@cisco.com>
>> Subject: RE: [cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
>> To: "Mark Tohill" <Mark@u.tv>, <cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> <70B7A1CCBFA5C649BD562B6D9F7ED784DD71E4@xmb-ams-333.emea.cisco.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> VAI bandwidth is usually picked up from a lower layer (ATM, ISDN,
>> L2TP), really depends what this Interface is bound to (ATM vc, PPPoE,
>> L2TP/PPPoVPDN, ISDN, etc.))..
>>
>> oli
>>
>> P.S: "Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)",
>> the "removed" doesn't sound right..
>>
>> Mark Tohill <> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 5:48 PM:
>>
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Has anyone any idea where Bandwidth figures are got from?
>>>
>>> Are they picked up at an ATM level? i.e Why do the two examples
>>> below differ?
>>>
>>> Any help appreciated.
>>>
>>> sh int Vi8098
>>>
>>> Virtual-Access8098 is up, line protocol is up
>>>
>>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>>>
>>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>>>
>>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> sh int Vi8518
>>>
>>> Virtual-Access8518 is up, line protocol is up
>>>
>>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>>>
>>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>>>
>>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 565 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,
>>>
>>> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-bba mailing list
>> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>>
>>
>> End of cisco-bba Digest, Vol 26, Issue 2
>> ****************************************
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-bba mailing list
>> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-bba mailing list
> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>
Re: Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces [ In reply to ]
Hi,

That doesn't work, if the incorrect speeds are being set by the LAC then
that overrides whatever you try and set on the LNS in the radius
profile.

I've had a similar problem before and ended up re-configuring the
virtual-template on the LNS after login to reset the bandwidth on all
the existing sessions to what I specify.

Rgds,

Ben


On Thu, 07 Jul 2005, Nigel Camp wrote:
>
> You can always set the bandwidth from radius for the virtual-access.
>
> Cheers,
> Nigel
>
> On 07/07/2005, at 2:26 AM, Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) wrote:
>
> > So you terminate L2TP sessions? Then it's the LAC's connect-speed
> > which
> > is sent during ICRQ as L2TP AVP. You have no control over it on the
> > LNS..
> >
> > oli
> >
> > Mark Tohill <> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 6:13 PM:
> >
> >
> >> Apologies,
> >>
> >> Replied to digest and removed subject....
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Mark Tohill
> >> Sent: 06 July 2005 17:11
> >> To: 'cisco-bba@puck.nether.net'
> >> Subject: RE:[cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
> >>
> >> Sorry, Oliver
> >>
> >> I removed that Loopback IP! (paranoia in family for years)
> >>
> >> .
> >> .
> >> .
> >>
> >> no vpdn history failure cause normal
> >> vpdn history failure table-size 50
> >> vpdn session-limit 16000
> >> vpdn ip udp ignore checksum
> >> !
> >> vpdn-group 1
> >> description VPDN-GROUP-1
> >> accept-dialin
> >> protocol l2tp
> >> virtual-template 1
> >> terminate-from hostname <removed>
> >> source-ip <removed>
> >> lcp renegotiation on-mismatch
> >> l2tp tunnel password <removed>
> >> !
> >> virtual-template 1 pre-clone 8000
> >> !
> >>
> >> interface ATM1/0.101 point-to-point
> >> description Fibre 1
> >> bandwidth 74880
> >> ip address <removed>
> >> pvc 101/35
> >> vbr-nrt 74880 74880 290
> >> oam-pvc manage
> >> oam retry 2 2 2
> >> encapsulation aal5snap
> >> !
> >> !
> >> interface ATM1/0.201 point-to-point
> >> description Fibre 2
> >> bandwidth 74880
> >> ip address <removed>
> >> pvc 201/35
> >> vbr-nrt 74880 74880 290
> >> oam-pvc manage
> >> oam retry 2 2 2
> >> encapsulation aal5snap
> >>
> >>
> >> interface Virtual-Template1
> >> description Virtual-Template
> >> ip unnumbered Loopback0
> >> ip tcp adjust-mss 1420
> >> ip mroute-cache
> >> no logging event link-status
> >> load-interval 30
> >> no snmp trap link-status
> >> ntp disable
> >> peer default ip address pool dp01 dp02 dp03 dp04 dp05 dp06 dp07 dp08
> >> dp09
> >> dp10 dp11 dp12 dp13 dp14 dp15 dp16 dp17 dp18 dp19
> >> keepalive 100
> >> ppp authentication chap
> >>
> >>
> >> Mark
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net
> >> [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> >> cisco-bba-request@puck.nether.net
> >> Sent: 06 July 2005 17:00
> >> To: cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> >> Subject: cisco-bba Digest, Vol 26, Issue 2
> >>
> >> Send cisco-bba mailing list submissions to
> >> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> >>
> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
> >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >> cisco-bba-request@puck.nether.net
> >>
> >> You can reach the person managing the list at
> >> cisco-bba-owner@puck.nether.net
> >>
> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> >> than "Re: Contents of cisco-bba digest..."
> >>
> >>
> >> Today's Topics:
> >>
> >> 1. Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces (Mark Tohill)
> >> 2. RE: Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
> >> (Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer))
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> -
> >>
> >> Message: 1
> >> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 16:47:59 +0100
> >> From: "Mark Tohill" <Mark@u.tv>
> >> Subject: [cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
> >> To: <cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
> >> Message-ID:
> >> <658F94741F4A8A4F94171E37E417488B0A316B@UTVEXCHANGE.utv.local>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Has anyone any idea where Bandwidth figures are got from?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Are they picked up at an ATM level? i.e Why do the two examples below
> >> differ?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Any help appreciated.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Mark
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> sh int Vi8098
> >>
> >> Virtual-Access8098 is up, line protocol is up
> >>
> >> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
> >>
> >> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
> >>
> >> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> sh int Vi8518
> >>
> >> Virtual-Access8518 is up, line protocol is up
> >>
> >> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
> >>
> >> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
> >>
> >> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 565 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,
> >>
> >> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -------------- next part --------------
> >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> >> URL:
> >>
> >>
> > https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-bba/attachments/20050706/
> > a6a07d1
> >
> >> 3/attachment-0001.html
> >>
> >> ------------------------------
> >>
> >> Message: 2
> >> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 17:55:22 +0200
> >> From: "Oliver Boehmer \(oboehmer\)" <oboehmer@cisco.com>
> >> Subject: RE: [cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
> >> To: "Mark Tohill" <Mark@u.tv>, <cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
> >> Message-ID:
> >>
> >> <70B7A1CCBFA5C649BD562B6D9F7ED784DD71E4@xmb-ams-333.emea.cisco.com>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> >>
> >> Mark,
> >>
> >> VAI bandwidth is usually picked up from a lower layer (ATM, ISDN,
> >> L2TP), really depends what this Interface is bound to (ATM vc, PPPoE,
> >> L2TP/PPPoVPDN, ISDN, etc.))..
> >>
> >> oli
> >>
> >> P.S: "Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)",
> >> the "removed" doesn't sound right..
> >>
> >> Mark Tohill <> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 5:48 PM:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Has anyone any idea where Bandwidth figures are got from?
> >>>
> >>> Are they picked up at an ATM level? i.e Why do the two examples
> >>> below differ?
> >>>
> >>> Any help appreciated.
> >>>
> >>> sh int Vi8098
> >>>
> >>> Virtual-Access8098 is up, line protocol is up
> >>>
> >>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
> >>>
> >>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
> >>>
> >>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> sh int Vi8518
> >>>
> >>> Virtual-Access8518 is up, line protocol is up
> >>>
> >>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
> >>>
> >>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
> >>>
> >>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 565 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,
> >>>
> >>> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ------------------------------
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cisco-bba mailing list
> >> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
> >>
> >>
> >> End of cisco-bba Digest, Vol 26, Issue 2
> >> ****************************************
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cisco-bba mailing list
> >> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-bba mailing list
> > cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-bba mailing list
> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
--
Ben White
KeConnect Internet
RE: RE: Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces [ In reply to ]
Oliver,

Response from Telco:

"The end users are given a traffic profile on the BRAS/LAC depending
upon the customers order. They are either half meg, 1 meg or 2 meg.
If the BRAS is Cisco the traffic profile is forwarded to the home
gateway/LNS. If the BRAS is Juniper ERX the taffic profile is not
forwarded."

Mark

-----Original Message-----
From: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) [mailto:oboehmer@cisco.com]
Sent: 06 July 2005 18:55
To: Mark Tohill
Subject: RE: RE:[cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces

mark,

you have to ask your Telco why they are sending you different speeds.
The speed is something which is done by the LAC according to the
physical line speed or something else, it can't be set via Radius on
their end.
You can check the speed sent to you in the L2TP ICCN by enabling "debug
vpdn l2x-packet" and look for L2TP AVP 24 or 38

this example was taken for an ISDN multilink connection (128k)

> Jun 2 01:43:32.362: Tnl/Sn 56399/1255 L2TP: Parse ICCN
> Jun 2 01:43:32.362: Tnl/Sn 56399/1255 L2TP: Parse AVP 24 len 10, flag
0x8000 (M)
> Jun 2 01:43:32.362: Tnl/Sn 56399/1255 L2TP: Connect Speed 128000
> Jun 2 01:43:32.362: Tnl/Sn 56399/1255 L2TP: Parse AVP 38 len 10, flag
0x0
> Jun 2 01:43:32.362: Tnl/Sn 56399/1255 L2TP: Rx Speed 128000

oli


Mark Tohill <mailto:Mark@u.tv> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 6:37
PM:

> Thanks for reply Oliver.
>
> Does this mean it's got from the telco's RADIUS configuration or is it
> manually configured on their LAC?
>
> I don't understand why I get differing Bandwidth figures for different
> users when they connect across L2TP to our LNS. Our telco simply
> checks via domain name or 'realm' and forwards session appropriately.
>
> Am I missing something?
>
> Mark
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) [mailto:oboehmer@cisco.com]
> Sent: 06 July 2005 17:27
> To: Mark Tohill; cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> Subject: RE: RE:[cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
>
> So you terminate L2TP sessions? Then it's the LAC's connect-speed
> which is sent during ICRQ as L2TP AVP. You have no control over it on
> the
> LNS..
>
> oli
>
> Mark Tohill <> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 6:13 PM:
>
>> Apologies,
>>
>> Replied to digest and removed subject....
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mark Tohill
>> Sent: 06 July 2005 17:11
>> To: 'cisco-bba@puck.nether.net'
>> Subject: RE:[cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
>>
>> Sorry, Oliver
>>
>> I removed that Loopback IP! (paranoia in family for years)
>>
>> .
>> .
>> .
>>
>> no vpdn history failure cause normal
>> vpdn history failure table-size 50
>> vpdn session-limit 16000
>> vpdn ip udp ignore checksum
>> !
>> vpdn-group 1
>> description VPDN-GROUP-1
>> accept-dialin
>> protocol l2tp
>> virtual-template 1
>> terminate-from hostname <removed>
>> source-ip <removed>
>> lcp renegotiation on-mismatch
>> l2tp tunnel password <removed>
>> !
>> virtual-template 1 pre-clone 8000
>> !
>>
>> interface ATM1/0.101 point-to-point
>> description Fibre 1
>> bandwidth 74880
>> ip address <removed>
>> pvc 101/35
>> vbr-nrt 74880 74880 290
>> oam-pvc manage
>> oam retry 2 2 2
>> encapsulation aal5snap
>> !
>> !
>> interface ATM1/0.201 point-to-point
>> description Fibre 2
>> bandwidth 74880
>> ip address <removed>
>> pvc 201/35
>> vbr-nrt 74880 74880 290
>> oam-pvc manage
>> oam retry 2 2 2
>> encapsulation aal5snap
>>
>>
>> interface Virtual-Template1
>> description Virtual-Template
>> ip unnumbered Loopback0
>> ip tcp adjust-mss 1420
>> ip mroute-cache
>> no logging event link-status
>> load-interval 30
>> no snmp trap link-status
>> ntp disable
>> peer default ip address pool dp01 dp02 dp03 dp04 dp05 dp06 dp07
>> dp08 dp09 dp10 dp11 dp12 dp13 dp14 dp15 dp16 dp17 dp18 dp19
>> keepalive 100
>> ppp authentication chap
>>
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net
>> [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
>> cisco-bba-request@puck.nether.net
>> Sent: 06 July 2005 17:00
>> To: cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
>> Subject: cisco-bba Digest, Vol 26, Issue 2
>>
>> Send cisco-bba mailing list submissions to
>> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> cisco-bba-request@puck.nether.net
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> cisco-bba-owner@puck.nether.net
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of cisco-bba digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces (Mark Tohill)
>> 2. RE: Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
>> (Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer))
>>
>>
>>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 16:47:59 +0100
>> From: "Mark Tohill" <Mark@u.tv>
>> Subject: [cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
>> To: <cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
>> Message-ID:
>> <658F94741F4A8A4F94171E37E417488B0A316B@UTVEXCHANGE.utv.local>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> Has anyone any idea where Bandwidth figures are got from?
>>
>>
>>
>> Are they picked up at an ATM level? i.e Why do the two examples
>> below differ?
>>
>>
>>
>> Any help appreciated.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>>
>> sh int Vi8098
>>
>> Virtual-Access8098 is up, line protocol is up
>>
>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>>
>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>>
>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec
>>
>>
>>
>> sh int Vi8518
>>
>> Virtual-Access8518 is up, line protocol is up
>>
>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>>
>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>>
>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 565 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,
>>
>> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL:
>>
>
https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-bba/attachments/20050706/a6a07d1
>> 3/attachment-0001.html
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 17:55:22 +0200
>> From: "Oliver Boehmer \(oboehmer\)" <oboehmer@cisco.com>
>> Subject: RE: [cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
>> To: "Mark Tohill" <Mark@u.tv>, <cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> <70B7A1CCBFA5C649BD562B6D9F7ED784DD71E4@xmb-ams-333.emea.cisco.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> Mark,
>>
>> VAI bandwidth is usually picked up from a lower layer (ATM, ISDN,
>> L2TP), really depends what this Interface is bound to (ATM vc,
>> PPPoE, L2TP/PPPoVPDN, ISDN, etc.))..
>>
>> oli
>>
>> P.S: "Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)",
>> the "removed" doesn't sound right..
>>
>> Mark Tohill <> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 5:48 PM:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Has anyone any idea where Bandwidth figures are got from?
>>>
>>> Are they picked up at an ATM level? i.e Why do the two examples
>>> below differ?
>>>
>>> Any help appreciated.
>>>
>>> sh int Vi8098
>>>
>>> Virtual-Access8098 is up, line protocol is up
>>>
>>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>>>
>>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>>>
>>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> sh int Vi8518
>>>
>>> Virtual-Access8518 is up, line protocol is up
>>>
>>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
>>>
>>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
>>>
>>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 565 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,
>>>
>>> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-bba mailing list
>> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>>
>>
>> End of cisco-bba Digest, Vol 26, Issue 2
>> ****************************************
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-bba mailing list
>> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
Re: RE: Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces [ In reply to ]
Hi,

I'm guessing it's BT?

I went through similar hoops with them some time ago, I've been told by
various techies there that they're waiting for software from Juniper to
fix the problem, although I know other ISP's that have been requesting
this for years.

I don't expect any resolution from them anytime soon.

Ben

On Fri, 08 Jul 2005, Mark Tohill wrote:
>
> Oliver,
>
> Response from Telco:
>
> "The end users are given a traffic profile on the BRAS/LAC depending
> upon the customers order. They are either half meg, 1 meg or 2 meg.
> If the BRAS is Cisco the traffic profile is forwarded to the home
> gateway/LNS. If the BRAS is Juniper ERX the taffic profile is not
> forwarded."
>
> Mark
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) [mailto:oboehmer@cisco.com]
> Sent: 06 July 2005 18:55
> To: Mark Tohill
> Subject: RE: RE:[cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
>
> mark,
>
> you have to ask your Telco why they are sending you different speeds.
> The speed is something which is done by the LAC according to the
> physical line speed or something else, it can't be set via Radius on
> their end.
> You can check the speed sent to you in the L2TP ICCN by enabling "debug
> vpdn l2x-packet" and look for L2TP AVP 24 or 38
>
> this example was taken for an ISDN multilink connection (128k)
>
> > Jun 2 01:43:32.362: Tnl/Sn 56399/1255 L2TP: Parse ICCN
> > Jun 2 01:43:32.362: Tnl/Sn 56399/1255 L2TP: Parse AVP 24 len 10, flag
> 0x8000 (M)
> > Jun 2 01:43:32.362: Tnl/Sn 56399/1255 L2TP: Connect Speed 128000
> > Jun 2 01:43:32.362: Tnl/Sn 56399/1255 L2TP: Parse AVP 38 len 10, flag
> 0x0
> > Jun 2 01:43:32.362: Tnl/Sn 56399/1255 L2TP: Rx Speed 128000
>
> oli
>
>
> Mark Tohill <mailto:Mark@u.tv> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 6:37
> PM:
>
> > Thanks for reply Oliver.
> >
> > Does this mean it's got from the telco's RADIUS configuration or is it
> > manually configured on their LAC?
> >
> > I don't understand why I get differing Bandwidth figures for different
> > users when they connect across L2TP to our LNS. Our telco simply
> > checks via domain name or 'realm' and forwards session appropriately.
> >
> > Am I missing something?
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) [mailto:oboehmer@cisco.com]
> > Sent: 06 July 2005 17:27
> > To: Mark Tohill; cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> > Subject: RE: RE:[cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
> >
> > So you terminate L2TP sessions? Then it's the LAC's connect-speed
> > which is sent during ICRQ as L2TP AVP. You have no control over it on
> > the
> > LNS..
> >
> > oli
> >
> > Mark Tohill <> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 6:13 PM:
> >
> >> Apologies,
> >>
> >> Replied to digest and removed subject....
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Mark Tohill
> >> Sent: 06 July 2005 17:11
> >> To: 'cisco-bba@puck.nether.net'
> >> Subject: RE:[cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
> >>
> >> Sorry, Oliver
> >>
> >> I removed that Loopback IP! (paranoia in family for years)
> >>
> >> .
> >> .
> >> .
> >>
> >> no vpdn history failure cause normal
> >> vpdn history failure table-size 50
> >> vpdn session-limit 16000
> >> vpdn ip udp ignore checksum
> >> !
> >> vpdn-group 1
> >> description VPDN-GROUP-1
> >> accept-dialin
> >> protocol l2tp
> >> virtual-template 1
> >> terminate-from hostname <removed>
> >> source-ip <removed>
> >> lcp renegotiation on-mismatch
> >> l2tp tunnel password <removed>
> >> !
> >> virtual-template 1 pre-clone 8000
> >> !
> >>
> >> interface ATM1/0.101 point-to-point
> >> description Fibre 1
> >> bandwidth 74880
> >> ip address <removed>
> >> pvc 101/35
> >> vbr-nrt 74880 74880 290
> >> oam-pvc manage
> >> oam retry 2 2 2
> >> encapsulation aal5snap
> >> !
> >> !
> >> interface ATM1/0.201 point-to-point
> >> description Fibre 2
> >> bandwidth 74880
> >> ip address <removed>
> >> pvc 201/35
> >> vbr-nrt 74880 74880 290
> >> oam-pvc manage
> >> oam retry 2 2 2
> >> encapsulation aal5snap
> >>
> >>
> >> interface Virtual-Template1
> >> description Virtual-Template
> >> ip unnumbered Loopback0
> >> ip tcp adjust-mss 1420
> >> ip mroute-cache
> >> no logging event link-status
> >> load-interval 30
> >> no snmp trap link-status
> >> ntp disable
> >> peer default ip address pool dp01 dp02 dp03 dp04 dp05 dp06 dp07
> >> dp08 dp09 dp10 dp11 dp12 dp13 dp14 dp15 dp16 dp17 dp18 dp19
> >> keepalive 100
> >> ppp authentication chap
> >>
> >>
> >> Mark
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net
> >> [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> >> cisco-bba-request@puck.nether.net
> >> Sent: 06 July 2005 17:00
> >> To: cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> >> Subject: cisco-bba Digest, Vol 26, Issue 2
> >>
> >> Send cisco-bba mailing list submissions to
> >> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> >>
> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
> >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >> cisco-bba-request@puck.nether.net
> >>
> >> You can reach the person managing the list at
> >> cisco-bba-owner@puck.nether.net
> >>
> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> >> than "Re: Contents of cisco-bba digest..."
> >>
> >>
> >> Today's Topics:
> >>
> >> 1. Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces (Mark Tohill)
> >> 2. RE: Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
> >> (Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer))
> >>
> >>
> >>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Message: 1
> >> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 16:47:59 +0100
> >> From: "Mark Tohill" <Mark@u.tv>
> >> Subject: [cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
> >> To: <cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
> >> Message-ID:
> >> <658F94741F4A8A4F94171E37E417488B0A316B@UTVEXCHANGE.utv.local>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Has anyone any idea where Bandwidth figures are got from?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Are they picked up at an ATM level? i.e Why do the two examples
> >> below differ?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Any help appreciated.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Mark
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> sh int Vi8098
> >>
> >> Virtual-Access8098 is up, line protocol is up
> >>
> >> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
> >>
> >> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
> >>
> >> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> sh int Vi8518
> >>
> >> Virtual-Access8518 is up, line protocol is up
> >>
> >> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
> >>
> >> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
> >>
> >> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 565 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,
> >>
> >> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -------------- next part --------------
> >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> >> URL:
> >>
> >
> https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-bba/attachments/20050706/a6a07d1
> >> 3/attachment-0001.html
> >>
> >> ------------------------------
> >>
> >> Message: 2
> >> Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 17:55:22 +0200
> >> From: "Oliver Boehmer \(oboehmer\)" <oboehmer@cisco.com>
> >> Subject: RE: [cisco-bba] Bandwidth on Virtual-Access interfaces
> >> To: "Mark Tohill" <Mark@u.tv>, <cisco-bba@puck.nether.net>
> >> Message-ID:
> >>
> >> <70B7A1CCBFA5C649BD562B6D9F7ED784DD71E4@xmb-ams-333.emea.cisco.com>
> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> >>
> >> Mark,
> >>
> >> VAI bandwidth is usually picked up from a lower layer (ATM, ISDN,
> >> L2TP), really depends what this Interface is bound to (ATM vc,
> >> PPPoE, L2TP/PPPoVPDN, ISDN, etc.))..
> >>
> >> oli
> >>
> >> P.S: "Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)",
> >> the "removed" doesn't sound right..
> >>
> >> Mark Tohill <> wrote on Wednesday, July 06, 2005 5:48 PM:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Has anyone any idea where Bandwidth figures are got from?
> >>>
> >>> Are they picked up at an ATM level? i.e Why do the two examples
> >>> below differ?
> >>>
> >>> Any help appreciated.
> >>>
> >>> sh int Vi8098
> >>>
> >>> Virtual-Access8098 is up, line protocol is up
> >>>
> >>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
> >>>
> >>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
> >>>
> >>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 155520 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> sh int Vi8518
> >>>
> >>> Virtual-Access8518 is up, line protocol is up
> >>>
> >>> Hardware is Virtual Access interface
> >>>
> >>> Interface is unnumbered. Using address of Loopback0 (removed)
> >>>
> >>> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 565 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec,
> >>>
> >>> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ------------------------------
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cisco-bba mailing list
> >> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
> >>
> >>
> >> End of cisco-bba Digest, Vol 26, Issue 2
> >> ****************************************
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cisco-bba mailing list
> >> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-bba mailing list
> cisco-bba@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
--
Ben White
KeConnect Internet