Hi Andy, We're using 12.2(33)SRD1 and recently before that SRC3 on 7204 LNS routers without any issues.
We don't have any eBGP on these devices, but iBGP works fine with about 9 peers on each router carrying internal MP-BGP routes. These routers also authenticate PPP sessions via RADIUS and that continues to function fine through the upgrade from SCR3 to SRD1 without problems. Perhaps you need to turn on some BGP & RADIUS debug and work out what is going wrong because it probably should work for you. If the BGP queues are sitting at 300, it means that your BGP speakers aren't talking to each other and you need to look at why (eg. MTU mismatch, disagree on some other parameter). There might be some defaults for BGP parameters that have been changed and you need to explicitly set now. Not very responsive on the command line suggests that CPU was busy doing other stuff (like continually setting up BGP sessions). If you have the time to do some debugging then you probably should be able to get a 12.2(33)SR version working. regards, Tony. --- On Fri, 7/8/09, Andy Ashley <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Andy Ashley <[email protected]> > Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco 7206 - IOS version for L2TPV3 > To: [email protected] > Date: Friday, 7 August, 2009, 2:20 AM > Hi, > > We are trying to upgrade IOS on a Cisco 7206VXR (NPE-G1) > processor (revision B) with 983040K/65536K bytes of memory. > > Currently running Version 12.3(13a), RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc2) > but we need L2TPv3 functionality to configure a xconnects > using a pw-class statement. > We tried running Version 12.2(33)SRC4, RELEASE SOFTWARE > (fc2) but the router was unstable. > > Our peering sessions would come up and die after about a > minute, the logs had lots of these entries: > > %BGP_SESSION-5-ADJCHANGE: neighbor X.X.X.X IPv4 Unicast > topology base removed from session BGP Notification > sent > > I noticed that the BGP sessions had high InQ and OutQ > values of 300+ where they usually sit at 0 and router was > generally not very responsive on the command line. > Also our RADIUS athentication was not working for some > reason. > > Is this just incompatability or unstable code? > Can anyone recommend an image version for this hardware > platform that has this feature set and is known to be stable > in your environment? > > Thanks. > > Andy. > > > > -- This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
