On Monday, August 22, 2011 06:10:47 AM John Elliot wrote: > Thanks - > > Have you implemented inter-chassis redundancy > > before?(As our asr's will be performing so many roles, > > dont know if this would work in our > > environment....maybe hsrp would be a better option)
If you mean FHRP's like HSRP, VRRP or GLBP, no. But I suspect those should be pretty stock features with nothing major to worry about. > Thanks - So > > qos does work on the asr's correct? Was it just that > > statistics were not working? We do "standard" > > gold,silver,bronze on our intercaps, and also do > > egress policies on some clients dot1q subints(Match > > what they have marked egree on CE, and give priority > > to certain markings)....do the asr's support this? Yes, you should be fine if you're running the latest code. However, I now remember that we were unable to run QoS (ingress marking) on an LACP interface. Cisco call the feature GEC QoS, which makes you wonder if the problem will re-surface when doing 10Gbps LACP. At any rate, Cisco said this should be available in IOS XE 3.4S. Suffice it to say, we haven't tested this yet. That said, Cisco said QoS capabilities on LACP sub-interfaces was supported - weird. One other thing that wasn't available for us at the time was MPLS-TE support on LACP links. We swapped these routers out for ASR9000's, so don't know whether MPLS-TE on LACP links is now possible. Like I said, the main problems with the ASR1000 is the software. > > Netflow is also something we utilise on the existing > > 7200's - asr's netflow functional? We're running FNF on the ASR1002's. No major drama, but then again we're just doing trending and TE management. Cheers, Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
