Re: [c-nsp] Define MPLS default EXP value?
There have been a couple of good answers already, but if you really want to change what EXP value is assigned to packets that have no other TOS marking, then you could also look at changing the dscp-exp map. >From what I have read (and I'm happy to be corrected on this) the PFC based >QoS defines an "internal DSCP" value from the TOS/COS bits on a packet and >then uses this to determine most QoS actions. There is a map that determines which DSCP value is mapped to which EXP value. You can see it with the command "show mls qos maps dscp-exp". If you wanted your default traffic to be something other than EXP-0, you could change the map so that DSCP-0 maps to something else, like this: mls qos map dscp-exp 0 to 5 Which would remap DSCP-0 to EXP-5 in this example so that any packets that were DSCP-0 would become EXP-5. I do think the suggestion on just leaving everything as EXP0 (for "normal" traffic) is the best. This is what we do and specifically remark anything that is "less than best effort" to EXP-1. It will probably be much simpler in the long run. regards, Tony. --- On Sat, 31/7/10, Patrick Abeldt wrote: > From: Patrick Abeldt > Subject: [c-nsp] Define MPLS default EXP value? > To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net > Received: Saturday, 31 July, 2010, 12:57 AM > Hi all, > > we're planning to introduce MPLS within our network > backbone, among other > things for QoS purposes. Our current concept is based > solely on using EXP > values for different priority levels (the IP TOS fields > need to be left > unchanged.) > > Aside from applications which require higher-than-normal > forwarding > priorities, we have a small number of traffic flows which > we'd like to > assign a lower-than-normal priority. As far as I can see, > this would > require an EXP value > 0 for standard traffic. More > precisely, I'd need to > set a specific default EXP value for all labels imposed on > a MPLS router, > regardless of interface etc. Are there easy methods to > achieve this goal, > preferably on the global configuration level? > > The only solution I've found so far is to impose that > default EXP value > via a service policy attached to the respective interfaces. > But given the > number of interface configs, this would be extremely > cumbersome to manage, > and additionally it would interfere with existing service > policies. I > think this is definitely not the way to go. > > Any suggestions regarding an alternative design would be > also welcome. > We're using c6500/Sup720/PFC3 devices with IOS version > s72033-advipservicesk9_wan-mz.122-33.SXI3. > > Thanks for your advice, > Patrick > > ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] GSR not switching multicast
How about allowing igmp message in/out the interface? permit igmp any any Matthew Huff | One Manhattanville Rd OTA Management LLC | Purchase, NY 10577 http://www.ox.com | Phone: 914-460-4039 aim: matthewbhuff | Fax: 914-460-4139 > -Original Message- > From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net > [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of > Daniska Tomas > Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 2:29 PM > To: cisco-nsp > Subject: [c-nsp] GSR not switching multicast > > Hi all, > > maybe it's just too late and I'm blind but can't leave home until I finish > this, does anyone have a > hint please? > > > IOS (tm) GS Software (C12KPRP-K4P-M), Version 12.0(32)SY4, RELEASE SOFTWARE > (fc1) > > PIM in SSM, everything is signalled fine. G2/0/5 is receiving multicast > streams, and should send to > G2/0/1.624. > > e.g., > (1.1.1.1, 239.232.1.6), 00:03:55/00:03:03, flags: sT > Incoming interface: GigabitEthernet2/0/5, RPF nbr 172.27.150.2 > Outgoing interface list: > GigabitEthernet2/0/1.624, Forward/Sparse, 00:03:55/00:03:03 > > > DC-BB-PP-01#sh ip mroute count > IP Multicast Statistics > 17 routes using 9442 bytes of memory > 9 groups, 0.88 average sources per group > Forwarding Counts: Pkt Count/Pkts per second/Avg Pkt Size/Kilobits per second > Other counts: Total/RPF failed/Other drops(OIF-null, rate-limit etc) > > Group: 239.232.1.6, Source count: 1, Group pkt count: 0 > Source: 1.1.1.1/32, Forwarding: 0/0/0/0, Other: 0/0/ > > (yes, 1.1.1.1 points to g2/0/5 via ospf) > > > input interface is nothing fancy, a SIP601 + GE SPA > > NAME: "slot 2", DESCR: "ISE 10G Modular Services Card v2" > PID: 12000-SIP-601 , VID: V08, SN: SAL1419HET4 > > NAME: "SPA subslot 2/0", DESCR: "10-port Gigabit Ethernet Shared Port Adapter" > PID: SPA-10X1GE-V2 , VID: V02, SN: JAE1416065R > > ! > interface GigabitEthernet2/0/5 > mtu 9180 > ip address > ip access-group blabla in > no ip directed-broadcast > ip pim sparse-mode > ip ospf authentication message-digest > ip ospf message-digest-key 1 md5 > ip ospf network point-to-point > ip ospf cost 100 > ip ospf hello-interval 1 > ip ospf dead-interval 5 > ip ospf bfd > ip ospf 65432 area 0 > load-interval 30 > negotiation auto > mpls label protocol ldp > tag-switching ip > bfd interval 50 min_rx 50 multiplier 5 > end > > > > sh int says > > 30 second input rate 3053000 bits/sec, 3834 packets/sec > 30 second output rate 14000 bits/sec, 24 packets/sec > 1417564 packets input, 141107670 bytes, 0 no buffer > Received 2 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles > 0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored > 0 watchdog, 3336 multicast, 0 pause input > > input rate is somewhat less than expected (4kpps), though 3336 multicasts > seen is pretty much low > > > sh int switching says >IPProcess 3727 314718605 79280 > Cache misses 0 > Fast 0 0 0 0 >Auton/SSE1338130 133252545 7420 506046 > > the input acl is just a desperate attempt to see what's coming in > > DC-BB-PP-01#sh ip access-lists blabla > Extended IP access list blabla > permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.1 > permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.2 > permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.3 > permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.4 > permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.5 > permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.6 > permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.7 > permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.0 > permit ip any any (4443 matches) > DC-BB-PP-01# > > i have tried everything from disabling/enabling mcast, reloading the > linecard, reloading the box to > reprogram the hw in case there's some bug... nothing helps. > > local SE sees nothing wrong with that. > > > > am i just dumb? :) > > > thanks for any hints > > -- > > Tomas Daniska > Senior CSE/BDM > > Soitron, a.s. > Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia > tel: +421 2 58224000, fax: +421 2 58224520 > > Good judgment comes from experience. Unfortunately, the experience usually > comes from poor judgment. > -- O 'Reilly's fundamentals of Aviation > > ___ > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] %ERROR: Standby doesn't support this command
On 7/30/10, Church, Charles wrote: > Anyone, > > I'm having issues with some 4510s with dual Sup6-E running > 12.2(53)SG2 doing this on interface range command. Making our deployment > kind of tough: > > SCUAS01(config-if)#interface range GigabitEthernet1/1 - 48 > SCUAS01(config-if-range)# switchport mode access > %ERROR: Standby doesn't support this command > % Command failed on interface. Aborting > SCUAS01(config)# I don't remember the error message, but I've had that same type of problem where a 'switchport mode access' fails when applied to a range. A default int range g1/1 - 48 int range g1/1 - 48 switchport mode access gets around the problem. But we have very few switches with dual supervisors, so it might be a work-around for a different problem... Regards, Lee > > In the release notes it claims a similar issue was fixed: > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst4500/release/note/OL_51 > 84.htmlCSCsa67042 But that's from a while ago. I'm told by our > installer guy that occasionally it is accepted, seems to depend on if the > switch was recently rebooted, he claims. The interface type is correct. I > tried using bug navigator, but it's not giving me any results, not sure if > it's working right today, or if I've got a browser issue. Any help > appreciated. > > Thanks, > > Chuck > > ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] GSR not switching multicast
Hi all, maybe it's just too late and I'm blind but can't leave home until I finish this, does anyone have a hint please? IOS (tm) GS Software (C12KPRP-K4P-M), Version 12.0(32)SY4, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) PIM in SSM, everything is signalled fine. G2/0/5 is receiving multicast streams, and should send to G2/0/1.624. e.g., (1.1.1.1, 239.232.1.6), 00:03:55/00:03:03, flags: sT Incoming interface: GigabitEthernet2/0/5, RPF nbr 172.27.150.2 Outgoing interface list: GigabitEthernet2/0/1.624, Forward/Sparse, 00:03:55/00:03:03 DC-BB-PP-01#sh ip mroute count IP Multicast Statistics 17 routes using 9442 bytes of memory 9 groups, 0.88 average sources per group Forwarding Counts: Pkt Count/Pkts per second/Avg Pkt Size/Kilobits per second Other counts: Total/RPF failed/Other drops(OIF-null, rate-limit etc) Group: 239.232.1.6, Source count: 1, Group pkt count: 0 Source: 1.1.1.1/32, Forwarding: 0/0/0/0, Other: 0/0/ (yes, 1.1.1.1 points to g2/0/5 via ospf) input interface is nothing fancy, a SIP601 + GE SPA NAME: "slot 2", DESCR: "ISE 10G Modular Services Card v2" PID: 12000-SIP-601 , VID: V08, SN: SAL1419HET4 NAME: "SPA subslot 2/0", DESCR: "10-port Gigabit Ethernet Shared Port Adapter" PID: SPA-10X1GE-V2 , VID: V02, SN: JAE1416065R ! interface GigabitEthernet2/0/5 mtu 9180 ip address ip access-group blabla in no ip directed-broadcast ip pim sparse-mode ip ospf authentication message-digest ip ospf message-digest-key 1 md5 ip ospf network point-to-point ip ospf cost 100 ip ospf hello-interval 1 ip ospf dead-interval 5 ip ospf bfd ip ospf 65432 area 0 load-interval 30 negotiation auto mpls label protocol ldp tag-switching ip bfd interval 50 min_rx 50 multiplier 5 end sh int says 30 second input rate 3053000 bits/sec, 3834 packets/sec 30 second output rate 14000 bits/sec, 24 packets/sec 1417564 packets input, 141107670 bytes, 0 no buffer Received 2 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles 0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored 0 watchdog, 3336 multicast, 0 pause input input rate is somewhat less than expected (4kpps), though 3336 multicasts seen is pretty much low sh int switching says IPProcess 3727 314718605 79280 Cache misses 0 Fast 0 0 0 0 Auton/SSE1338130 133252545 7420 506046 the input acl is just a desperate attempt to see what's coming in DC-BB-PP-01#sh ip access-lists blabla Extended IP access list blabla permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.1 permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.2 permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.3 permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.4 permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.5 permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.6 permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.7 permit ip host 1.1.1.1 host 239.232.1.0 permit ip any any (4443 matches) DC-BB-PP-01# i have tried everything from disabling/enabling mcast, reloading the linecard, reloading the box to reprogram the hw in case there's some bug... nothing helps. local SE sees nothing wrong with that. am i just dumb? :) thanks for any hints -- Tomas Daniska Senior CSE/BDM Soitron, a.s. Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia tel: +421 2 58224000, fax: +421 2 58224520 Good judgment comes from experience. Unfortunately, the experience usually comes from poor judgment. -- O 'Reilly's fundamentals of Aviation ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] GigE Throughput on 3825
That's exactly what I was looking for. Thanks! -Jeff -Original Message- From: Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:swm...@swm.pp.se] Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 12:21 PM To: Jeff Wojciechowski Cc: Benjamin Lovell; Seth Mattinen; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] GigE Throughput on 3825 On Fri, 30 Jul 2010, Jeff Wojciechowski wrote: > Thanks to everyone who has already responded on and offline. > > So it really boils down to the router can forward so many pps limited by the > power of the CPU and depending on packet size actual bandwidth may vary? Google for , it has a lot of good information on best-case performance numbers for different platforms. -- Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se This electronic mail (including any attachments) may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure to anyone other than its intended recipient(s). Any dissemination or use of this electronic mail or its contents (including any attachments) by persons other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please delete the original message in its entirety (including any attachments) and notify us immediately by reply email so that we may correct our internal records. Midland Paper Company accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage from use of this electronic mail, including any damage resulting from a computer virus. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] GigE Throughput on 3825
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010, Jeff Wojciechowski wrote: Thanks to everyone who has already responded on and offline. So it really boils down to the router can forward so many pps limited by the power of the CPU and depending on packet size actual bandwidth may vary? Google for , it has a lot of good information on best-case performance numbers for different platforms. -- Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] GigE Throughput on 3825
Thanks to everyone who has already responded on and offline. So it really boils down to the router can forward so many pps limited by the power of the CPU and depending on packet size actual bandwidth may vary? -Jeff -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Benjamin Lovell Sent: Friday, July 30, 2010 10:28 AM To: Seth Mattinen Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] GigE Throughput on 3825 Seth is completely correct that it's all about CPU. Don't quote me but I think we rate the 3825 at about 300 kpps(number is out of date so newer IOS may not reach this number) . This is likely a 0 feature number so it could be much lower if QoS, GRE, uRPF, etc, etc, etc are used. -Ben This electronic mail (including any attachments) may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure to anyone other than its intended recipient(s). Any dissemination or use of this electronic mail or its contents (including any attachments) by persons other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please delete the original message in its entirety (including any attachments) and notify us immediately by reply email so that we may correct our internal records. Midland Paper Company accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage from use of this electronic mail, including any damage resulting from a computer virus. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Define MPLS default EXP value?
Ignoring some of the more exotic QoS that can be done on the 7600 CWAN cards, on the 6500/7600 platform you only have two options I am aware of. 1) trust the incoming TOS and it will be mapped to EXP automatically. 2) use service-policy on non-trusted interface to set all EXP values manually. -Ben On Jul 30, 2010, at 10:57 AM, Patrick Abeldt wrote: > Hi all, > > we're planning to introduce MPLS within our network backbone, among other > things for QoS purposes. Our current concept is based solely on using EXP > values for different priority levels (the IP TOS fields need to be left > unchanged.) > > Aside from applications which require higher-than-normal forwarding > priorities, we have a small number of traffic flows which we'd like to > assign a lower-than-normal priority. As far as I can see, this would > require an EXP value > 0 for standard traffic. More precisely, I'd need to > set a specific default EXP value for all labels imposed on a MPLS router, > regardless of interface etc. Are there easy methods to achieve this goal, > preferably on the global configuration level? > > The only solution I've found so far is to impose that default EXP value > via a service policy attached to the respective interfaces. But given the > number of interface configs, this would be extremely cumbersome to manage, > and additionally it would interfere with existing service policies. I > think this is definitely not the way to go. > > Any suggestions regarding an alternative design would be also welcome. > We're using c6500/Sup720/PFC3 devices with IOS version > s72033-advipservicesk9_wan-mz.122-33.SXI3. > > Thanks for your advice, > Patrick > > > ___ > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Define MPLS default EXP value?
On 30.7.2010 17:57, Patrick Abeldt wrote: Hi all, we're planning to introduce MPLS within our network backbone, among other things for QoS purposes. Our current concept is based solely on using EXP values for different priority levels (the IP TOS fields need to be left unchanged.) Aside from applications which require higher-than-normal forwarding priorities, we have a small number of traffic flows which we'd like to assign a lower-than-normal priority. As far as I can see, this would require an EXP value> 0 for standard traffic. More precisely, I'd need to set a specific default EXP value for all labels imposed on a MPLS router, regardless of interface etc. Are there easy methods to achieve this goal, preferably on the global configuration level? The only solution I've found so far is to impose that default EXP value via a service policy attached to the respective interfaces. But given the number of interface configs, this would be extremely cumbersome to manage, and additionally it would interfere with existing service policies. I think this is definitely not the way to go. Any suggestions regarding an alternative design would be also welcome. We're using c6500/Sup720/PFC3 devices with IOS version s72033-advipservicesk9_wan-mz.122-33.SXI3. Thanks for your advice, Patrick ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ Hi, I believe you shouldn't think that higher exp value traffic is always better than a lower value. As RFC 5127 states, exp 1 is recommended for less than best effort and exp 0 is default/best effort So why not just let your standard traffic be default at 0 and put your less-than-best-effort to exp 1. Numbers really don't matter, aye? You just match what ever exp value you want and then have an action based on the match /Lauri ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] GigE Throughput on 3825
Seth is completely correct that it's all about CPU. Don't quote me but I think we rate the 3825 at about 300 kpps(number is out of date so newer IOS may not reach this number) . This is likely a 0 feature number so it could be much lower if QoS, GRE, uRPF, etc, etc, etc are used. -Ben On Jul 29, 2010, at 10:10 PM, Seth Mattinen wrote: > On 7/29/2010 15:07, Paul Stewart wrote: >> We have several in production but have never pushed them to their limits. >> One that comes to mind is a 3825 with max memory/max flash - it's going DHCP >> services to 1200 students in a university residence, handing off a few meg >> of voice traffic to those students and running two full BGP tables providing >> IP Transit at 100 meg peak to the university as well. Nothing really fancy >> but the CPU never peaks above 9% on average. >> >> Another 3825 is currently running as a POP router handling about 130Mb/s of >> peak traffic, runs a good size OSPF table and has 16 port Gig card fully >> populated with each port doing routing. Peak CPU is 11% average on that >> box. >> >> I have seen some customers push them with 300-400Mb/s of traffic but am not >> sure how they really handled at that point - whether or not the CPU is >> pushing it or not. Cisco 7206VXR with NPE-2G comes to mind if you don't >> want any hassles with higher traffic levels - of course you're into higher >> budget too ;) >> > > > It's all CPU on an ISR or 7200. What matters is the packet size. It can > handle flows with large packets beyond what Cisco would officially > recommend them for (i.e. a file transfer), but throw a lot of tiny UDP > at it you'll quickly run out of headroom far below what you would expect. > > ~Seth > ___ > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] %ERROR: Standby doesn't support this command
Anyone, I'm having issues with some 4510s with dual Sup6-E running 12.2(53)SG2 doing this on interface range command. Making our deployment kind of tough: SCUAS01(config-if)#interface range GigabitEthernet1/1 - 48 SCUAS01(config-if-range)# switchport mode access %ERROR: Standby doesn't support this command % Command failed on interface. Aborting SCUAS01(config)# In the release notes it claims a similar issue was fixed: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst4500/release/note/OL_51 84.htmlCSCsa67042 But that's from a while ago. I'm told by our installer guy that occasionally it is accepted, seems to depend on if the switch was recently rebooted, he claims. The interface type is correct. I tried using bug navigator, but it's not giving me any results, not sure if it's working right today, or if I've got a browser issue. Any help appreciated. Thanks, Chuck smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] Define MPLS default EXP value?
Hi all, we're planning to introduce MPLS within our network backbone, among other things for QoS purposes. Our current concept is based solely on using EXP values for different priority levels (the IP TOS fields need to be left unchanged.) Aside from applications which require higher-than-normal forwarding priorities, we have a small number of traffic flows which we'd like to assign a lower-than-normal priority. As far as I can see, this would require an EXP value > 0 for standard traffic. More precisely, I'd need to set a specific default EXP value for all labels imposed on a MPLS router, regardless of interface etc. Are there easy methods to achieve this goal, preferably on the global configuration level? The only solution I've found so far is to impose that default EXP value via a service policy attached to the respective interfaces. But given the number of interface configs, this would be extremely cumbersome to manage, and additionally it would interfere with existing service policies. I think this is definitely not the way to go. Any suggestions regarding an alternative design would be also welcome. We're using c6500/Sup720/PFC3 devices with IOS version s72033-advipservicesk9_wan-mz.122-33.SXI3. Thanks for your advice, Patrick ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] vPC Object Tracking (used when vPC Peer Link with Single 10G Module)
I am looking for the vPC Object Tracking Solution NX-OS configuration that solve blackout issue when using vPC Peer Link with Single 10G Module. The vPC object tracking enhancement tracks uplinks and vPC peer link as an object list. When vPC object tracking is enabled, a vPC peer detects the tracked object going-down state (simultaneous failure of peer-link and uplinks interfaces) and locally suspends vPCs. The feature targets a topology where peer-link and uplinks are located on the same card (that is, a single point of failure) or a case where simultaneous failure of these interfaces is cause for a concern. In this scenario, suspending local vPCs through the vPC object tracking feature allows you to avoid potential traffic black-holing. Is the following configuration correct on both Primary and Secondary vPC? interface Ethernet 1/1 channel-group 5 mode active ! interface Ethernet 1/2 channel-group 5 mode active ! interface port-channel 5 vpc peer-link ! track 5 interface port-channel 5 ! vpc domain 5 track 5 or not ;) Feedback welcome. R/ Manu ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Smart Net for used Cisco
SOP. It is in my experience easier if you have Network Hardware arrange the smartnet as well when you buy it, otherwise cisco might have you do something like send them a picture of the serial number on the card or something crazy like that (I've heard). I buy used/rfb all the time from my VAR (world data products), no issues with support other the occasional mistaken serial number because someone typed it wrong that will happen irrespective of anything else. Network Hardware should be no different. And sometimes buying used is the only option because you can't buy it new from Cisco because they're out of stock. :I > How does Cisco handle Smart Nets for used equipment ? I am looking to buy a > 7206 G2 from Network Hardware. They say they make sure that the equipment > they sell me will be able to get a Smart Net. Whatever that means. > > Thanks, > > -- > James H. Edwards > Senior Network Systems Administrator > Judicial Information Division > jedwa...@nmcourts.gov ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Multicast issues on 7600s with WS-6748-sfp blades
>It never worked, when I sent that reply I had mistakenly thought it >was an internal email. I feel sorry for you Tim :-) ... you continue to get beat up for a simple mistake from many many moons ago! This e-mail, including any attachments and response string, may contain proprietary information which is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is for the intended recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, please notify the author by return e-mail and delete this message and any attachment immediately. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, distribute, forward, copy, print or rely on this e-mail in any way except as permitted by the author. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Juniper M320 vs. 7600/SUP320-3BXL and WS-X6148A-GE-TX
what about asr9k with low-queue cards? its price and performance is reasonable as well. br, A. On Wed, 28 Jul 2010, Chris Hale wrote: Hello, Looking for options to our next upgrade from our 7200VXR platform. Someone suggested 7600 and the WS-X6148A-GE-TX cards with a SUP720-3BXL. We're doing BGP (4-5 full iBGP peers, 13 external peers (3 upstream, 10 downstream), all full routes), dot1q trunks, EoMPLS with L2VPNs. We will most likely do dot1q trunks to our agg switches at our other POPs with MPLS and L2VPNs being started/terminated on dot1q trunks. We're also looking to roll out IPv6 services in the next few months. Our options we're looking at are a Juniper M320 w/RE-1600 and SFP PIC (PB-4GE-SFP). I don't necessarily need the port density of the 48-port Cisco card, but it's always nice to have. Any reason not to start with the 6148A card and upgrade to the OSM cards, etc., I'm open to suggestions, opinions, etc, and especially any gotchas with either platform. Thanks, Chris ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
