Hi Jack
errdisable detect on Cisco 7600 routers (not sure what you have?)
To enable error-disable detection, use the errdisable detect cause command.
Use the no form of this command to disable error-disable detection.
errdisable detect cause {all | dtp-flap | l2ptguard | link-flap | pagp-flap
| udld}
no errdisable detect cause {all | dtp-flap | l2ptguard | link-flap |
pagp-flap | udld}
OR
Depending on your Mux - check whether the mux vendor allows some kind of
detection or standby options - I used to do that on Newbridge mux's in those
days.
Hope this helps
A Raaz
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: 28 November 2010 17:00
To: [email protected]
Subject: cisco-nsp Digest, Vol 96, Issue 98
Send cisco-nsp mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of cisco-nsp digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: link flaps (jack daniels)
2. Re: link flaps (Keegan Holley)
3. Re: link flaps (Mindaugas Kubilius)
4. Re: VPLS Simulation (Mohammad Khalil)
5. rate limit (Mohammad Khalil)
6. Re: rate limit (Jared Mauch)
7. Re: rate limit (Keegan Holley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 23:33:58 +0530
From: jack daniels <[email protected]>
To: Keegan Holley <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] link flaps
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
any comments Dear friends would be most appreciated and very helpfull for
me.
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 9:30 AM, jack daniels <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Hmm... laying intercity cables Technically good ....but not
> commercialy (which is most important).. ?:)
>
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Keegan Holley
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> You can always get a really long cable so you don't need the MUX's.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 2:49 PM, jack daniels <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> I have a scenario
>>>
>>>
>>> Router R1 --------------Ethernet
>>> Cable-----MUX----------------MUX-----------Ethernet Cable-------Router
>>> R2
>>>
>>>
>>> my MUX to MUX link flaps a lot and my traffic impacts ....I have
>>> backup links also. Can I do something that when link MUX to MUX flaps
>>> I dont
>>> use this for some time , till it stablizes.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>>>
>>
>>
>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 13:34:05 -0500
From: Keegan Holley <[email protected]>
To: jack daniels <[email protected]>
Cc: "<[email protected]>" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] link flaps
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Could you supply more info? What kind of link goes between the mux's? What
kind of mux's? Why can't you just fix the link? Is protection an option?
Can you run a second link for redundancy?
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 27, 2010, at 1:03 PM, jack daniels <[email protected]> wrote:
> any comments Dear friends would be most appreciated and very helpfull for
me.
>
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 9:30 AM, jack daniels <[email protected]>
wrote:
>> Hmm... laying intercity cables Technically good ....but not
>> commercialy (which is most important).. :)
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Keegan Holley
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> You can always get a really long cable so you don't need the MUX's.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 2:49 PM, jack daniels <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>> I have a scenario
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Router R1 --------------Ethernet
>>>> Cable-----MUX----------------MUX-----------Ethernet Cable-------Router
>>>> R2
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> my MUX to MUX link flaps a lot and my traffic impacts ....I have
>>>> backup links also. Can I do something that when link MUX to MUX flaps
>>>> I dont
>>>> use this for some time , till it stablizes.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 22:17:19 +0200
From: Mindaugas Kubilius <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] link flaps
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
If a mux link down does bring the router interface down as well, you
could look at IP route dampening on the interface:
dampening ...
Otherwise kind of dynamic routing/BFD/IPSLA methods can be applied. E.g.
BGP with route dampening. Or tracked static routes with IPSLA object
tracking..
Regards,
Mindaugas
On 2010.11.27 20:03, jack daniels wrote:
> any comments Dear friends would be most appreciated and very helpfull for
me.
>
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 9:30 AM, jack daniels<[email protected]>
wrote:
>> Hmm... laying intercity cables Technically good ....but not
>> commercialy (which is most important).. :)
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Keegan Holley
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> You can always get a really long cable so you don't need the MUX's.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 2:49 PM, jack daniels<[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>> I have a scenario
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Router R1 --------------Ethernet
>>>> Cable-----MUX----------------MUX-----------Ethernet Cable-------Router
>>>> R2
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> my MUX to MUX link flaps a lot and my traffic impacts ....I have
>>>> backup links also. Can I do something that when link MUX to MUX flaps
>>>> I dont
>>>> use this for some time , till it stablizes.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 15:05:34 +0200
From: Mohammad Khalil <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VPLS Simulation
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1256"
Thanks all
> Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 13:10:06 +0200
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> CC: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VPLS Simulation
>
> you can only do AToM on gns. cisco support vpls on specific card and
> platforms. eg 7600 series and some specific card on that series.
>
>
> 2010/11/25 Robert Maier <[email protected]>
>
> > the only "switch" you can use in GNS is a NM-16ESW module, i don?t think
> > that this module supports VPLS. Maybe you have this option a simulator
like
> > Boson oder packettracer ?But i think, chances are not good
> >
> > Am 24.11.2010 23:04, schrieb Mohammad Khalil:
> >
> > i have looked into GNS3 but it does not support VPLS simulation
> >> is there anyway i can simulate VPLS ?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/
> >
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 15:50:21 +0200
From: Mohammad Khalil <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: [c-nsp] rate limit
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1256"
hi all
i have Cisco 7606-S with IOS c7600s72033-advipservices-mz.122-33.SRD4.bin
i am trying to rate limit outbound traffic on interface vlan , but no rate
limit or traffic shape command is there ?
what is the proper solution if applicable
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 08:55:33 -0500
From: Jared Mauch <[email protected]>
To: Mohammad Khalil <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] rate limit
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
policy-map + policer
On Nov 28, 2010, at 8:50 AM, Mohammad Khalil wrote:
>
> hi all
>
> i have Cisco 7606-S with IOS c7600s72033-advipservices-mz.122-33.SRD4.bin
> i am trying to rate limit outbound traffic on interface vlan , but no rate
limit or traffic shape command is there ?
> what is the proper solution if applicable
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 11:38:18 -0500
From: Keegan Holley <[email protected]>
To: Mohammad Khalil <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] rate limit
Message-ID:
<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Mohammad Khalil
<[email protected]>wrote:
>
> hi all
>
> i have Cisco 7606-S with IOS c7600s72033-advipservices-mz.122-33.SRD4.bin
> i am trying to rate limit outbound traffic on interface vlan , but no rate
> limit or traffic shape command is there ?
> what is the proper solution if applicable
>
> Those are more or less legacy methods. They recommend doing everything
with the MQC (Modular QOS CLI). It's the policy map+policer combination
that the other poster referred to. This should get you started.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/technologies/tk543/tk545/technologies_white_paper
09186a0080123415.html
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list
[email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
End of cisco-nsp Digest, Vol 96, Issue 98
*****************************************
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
