Team,
I just realized that with only a few SVIs and one static route I got the message bellow when using the SDM Template "lanbase-routing": %PLATFORM_UCAST-4-PREFIX: One or more, more specific prefixes could not be programmed into TCAM and are being covered by a less specific prefix, and the packets may be software forwarded Looking at the SDM Table comparison on the link bellow, it seems I am hitting the maximum value for the "number of indirect IPv4 routes": http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/lan/catalyst2960x/software/15- 2_2_e/system_manage/configuration_guide/b_sm_1522e_2960x_cg/b_sm_152ex_2960- x_cg_chapter_0100.html So it seems the more appropriate SDM Template for my setup is the Template "lanbase-default" instead of the "lanbase-routing". What I don't understand is why the "lanbase-routing" has much less resources for routing purposes than the "lanbase-default" template. They call it routing, right ? But the context sensitive help shows this: 2960x-lab(config)#sdm prefer ? default Default bias lanbase-default Enhanced support for both IPv4 and IPv6 Routing lanbase-routing Supports both IPv4 and IPv6 Static Routing 2960x-lab(config)# The "lanbase-default" is enhanced for routing ??? And the "lanbase-routing" is not ??? What am I missing here ? I tested the "lanbase-default" template and it works fine. No TCAM error messages and routing works normally (between SVIs and using the static route). I'm using 15.2(2)E3. Thanks. Regards, Antonio Soares, CCIE #18473 (RS/SP/DC) <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] http://www.ccie18473.net <http://www.ccie18473.net/> _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
