[c-nsp] ASR1004 with SIP40 & RP1
Hi all, Due to a 'slight' oversight, I've placed a SIP40 in an ASR1004 with an RP1 installed. According to the documentation, this is not supported. Tests however, show that it functions correctly. I'm getting link on the installed SPA's, 'show tech' doesn't crash :) Does anybody have a similar setup in production, or any comments on using this particular setup ? Robert ___ 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] Is the Nexus 3064PQ usable ?
On 12/06/14 18:13, Dan Brisson wrote: Also, the Nexus line may not have features that you want in a campus, such as layer 2 protections like dhcp snooping, DAI, etc... That said, just make sure you know what features you need, including IPv6 features, which without verifying, I'm guessing are more plentiful in the Catalyst line. I also wouldn't be surprised if we see a new line of line cards & supervisor for the CAT6800 soonish. The 10G/40G density available today is pretty pathetic. Tom ___ 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] C6K, VS-S720-10G-3CXL, 15.1(2)SY
Internet in a VRF, transit and peering in separate VRFs, default from transit: RTR-1#sh run | i label mode mpls label mode all-vrfs protocol all-afs per-vrf RTR-1#sh mls cef maximum-routes FIB TCAM maximum routes : === Current :- --- IPv4- 608k (default) MPLS- 128k IPv6- 128k IP multicast- 16k RTR-1#sh mls cef summary detail Total routes:149194 IPv4 unicast routes: 124088 IPv4 non-vrf routes: 249 IPv4 non-vrf routes (internal): 0 IPv4 vrf routes: 123839 IPv4 vrf routes (internal): 0 IPv4 Multicast routes: 4 MPLS routes: 5112 IPv6 unicast routes: 19986 IPv6 non-vrf routes: 151 IPv6 non-vrf routes (internal): 0 IPv6 vrf routes: 19580 IPv6 vrf routes (internal): 255 IPv6 multicast routes: 3 EoM routes: 1 Numbers are safe, but I'm thinking of bumping ip-multicast to the minimum (don't need). Is it wise to have have MPLS carved out of TCAM separately, or can I combine it as IPv4+MPLS? Not much useful documentation on the subject. -- Tim:> ___ 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] C6K_MPLS_LC-SP-5-TCAM_EXCEPTION: TCAM exception occured for MPLS, traffic will be software switched
Not confirmed by Cisco, but in my experience, this is now a recoverable error. YMMV. On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 05:21:13PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote: > > On 04/06/2014 16:39, Antonio Soares wrote: > > > Usually it doesn't recover by itself > > > > there's no "usually" - this is an unrecoverable problem and the only > option > > is to reboot. > > That's what I used to think (it is not "unrecoverable", but Cisco decided > to not implement recovery[*]). OTOH on SXI "sh mls tcam ex" continued to > show "true" even after the overflow got fixed, while the OP's 15.1SY > went back to "false". > > So maybe someone actually fixed that one :-) > > [*] if you can program TCAM "from scratch" at bootup, I don't see why > you couldn't recover by clearing and reprogramming everything... yes, this > would hurt, but much less than a full reboot, or continuing to software- > forward. > > gert > > -- > USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! >// > www.muc.de/~gert/ > Gert Doering - Munich, Germany > g...@greenie.muc.de > fax: +49-89-35655025 > g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de > > ___ > 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/ > -- Tim:> ___ 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] Is the Nexus 3064PQ usable ?
We have a bunch of 3064s, and were very happy with them. We switched to the 3172 when those came out, and have been happy with those as well. The new 9396’s look good, and we’re about to start evals on those. -Bill signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail ___ 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] Is the Nexus 3064PQ usable ?
i’ve been involved quite extensively in n7k as campus distribution. this was pre-c6k/s2t during initial deployment and we’ve continued on same path for all sites, just with refreshed hardware on n7k (sup2/fab2/f2e instead of sup1/fab1/m1). the platform is robust, though nothing better than the catalyst line at this point. vpc is used to dual-home to each access idf. vdc used to split out chassis into multiple aggregation zones. aside from random bugs cropping up in the scheduler between 5.0 —> 5.1 —> 5.2 —> 6.x; everything has been solid. q. -- quinn snyder snyd...@gmail.com On Jun 12, 2014, at 4:59, Antoine Monnier wrote: > Thanks Michele for sharing the feedback you received on this. > > > Our cisco sales rep is telling us that he has never heard of Nexus used as > a campus distribution-layer and is trying to convince us that that Catalyst > 6807 is the right choice (instead of Nexus 56128P), even though we would > get less 10Gig port-density, 1:2 oversubscription, 5x more RU used, at > least twice the power consumption, etc... and all of this for twice the > price! > > Are there other people out there using Nexus (3x00 ? 5x00? 6x00 7x00?) at > the distribution-layer of medium-sized campus? > Medium-sized being about 60 access-layer closets with dual 10 Gig uplink > each and a small server-farm. > > > On the downside I hear that the "orphan port" scenario with vPC may be a > pain in the back side? I still need to read the details of this. > Is anyone running vPC at the distribution-layer of a campus environment? > > > Thanks > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Michele Bergonzoni > wrote: > >> Does anybody have success/horror stories about the [Nexus] 3064 or 3048 to >>> >>> share? If you email me in private, I can post an anonimized summary. >>> >> >> I received two very helpful replies. >> >> One person told me about some new 3172PQ: "I am loving them to death". >> This person is using them as L2, with vPC. >> >> One person is using the 3064X with OSPF, BGP VRRP and is happy with it. >> This is very similar to what I am trying to do. >> >> I still feel a bit uneasy, but I think we will end up trusting the >> datasheet. >> >> Cheers to all, >> >>Bergonz >> >> -- >> Ing. Michele Bergonzoni - Laboratori Guglielmo Marconi S.p.a. >> Phone:+39-051-6781926 e-mail: berg...@labs.it >> alt.advanced.networks.design.configure.operate >> ___ >> 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/ ___ 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] Is the Nexus 3064PQ usable ?
Revenue just gets dumped into different BU buckets and each has its own comp plan for the sales reps. It matters to them because it affects their pocket books :) On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Blake Dunlap wrote: > Cisco tries to tell us the same thing. We think it has a lot to do with the > fact they're competing with themselves campus vs datacenter, and this is a > much cheaper option with better scale. We are using 5672s and larger for > core / distro and cisco howeled about how its for datacenter and we should > use the 68s as well. > > -Blake > On Jun 12, 2014 10:38 AM, "Antoine Monnier" > wrote: > > > Thanks Michele for sharing the feedback you received on this. > > > > > > Our cisco sales rep is telling us that he has never heard of Nexus used > as > > a campus distribution-layer and is trying to convince us that that > Catalyst > > 6807 is the right choice (instead of Nexus 56128P), even though we would > > get less 10Gig port-density, 1:2 oversubscription, 5x more RU used, at > > least twice the power consumption, etc... and all of this for twice the > > price! > > > > Are there other people out there using Nexus (3x00 ? 5x00? 6x00 7x00?) at > > the distribution-layer of medium-sized campus? > > Medium-sized being about 60 access-layer closets with dual 10 Gig uplink > > each and a small server-farm. > > > > > > On the downside I hear that the "orphan port" scenario with vPC may be a > > pain in the back side? I still need to read the details of this. > > Is anyone running vPC at the distribution-layer of a campus environment? > > > > > > Thanks > > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Michele Bergonzoni > > wrote: > > > > > Does anybody have success/horror stories about the [Nexus] 3064 or 3048 > > to > > >> > > >> share? If you email me in private, I can post an anonimized summary. > > >> > > > > > > I received two very helpful replies. > > > > > > One person told me about some new 3172PQ: "I am loving them to death". > > > This person is using them as L2, with vPC. > > > > > > One person is using the 3064X with OSPF, BGP VRRP and is happy with it. > > > This is very similar to what I am trying to do. > > > > > > I still feel a bit uneasy, but I think we will end up trusting the > > > datasheet. > > > > > > Cheers to all, > > > > > > Bergonz > > > > > > -- > > > Ing. Michele Bergonzoni - Laboratori Guglielmo Marconi S.p.a. > > > Phone:+39-051-6781926 e-mail: berg...@labs.it > > > alt.advanced.networks.design.configure.operate > > > ___ > > > 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/ > > > ___ > 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] Is the Nexus 3064PQ usable ?
We had this same question about 3 years back and I'm not sure that anything has changed, but take this for what it's worth. The Nexus 5k line uses cut-through switching where your traditional catalyst line switches are store and forward. Here's a good link on this topic: http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/switches/nexus-5020-switch/white_paper_c11-465436.html Also, the Nexus line may not have features that you want in a campus, such as layer 2 protections like dhcp snooping, DAI, etc... That said, just make sure you know what features you need, including IPv6 features, which without verifying, I'm guessing are more plentiful in the Catalyst line. Hope that helps. -dan Dan Brisson Network Engineer University of Vermont (Ph) 802.656.8111 dbris...@uvm.edu On 6/12/2014 7:59 AM, Antoine Monnier wrote: Thanks Michele for sharing the feedback you received on this. Our cisco sales rep is telling us that he has never heard of Nexus used as a campus distribution-layer and is trying to convince us that that Catalyst 6807 is the right choice (instead of Nexus 56128P), even though we would get less 10Gig port-density, 1:2 oversubscription, 5x more RU used, at least twice the power consumption, etc... and all of this for twice the price! Are there other people out there using Nexus (3x00 ? 5x00? 6x00 7x00?) at the distribution-layer of medium-sized campus? Medium-sized being about 60 access-layer closets with dual 10 Gig uplink each and a small server-farm. On the downside I hear that the "orphan port" scenario with vPC may be a pain in the back side? I still need to read the details of this. Is anyone running vPC at the distribution-layer of a campus environment? Thanks On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Michele Bergonzoni wrote: Does anybody have success/horror stories about the [Nexus] 3064 or 3048 to share? If you email me in private, I can post an anonimized summary. I received two very helpful replies. One person told me about some new 3172PQ: "I am loving them to death". This person is using them as L2, with vPC. One person is using the 3064X with OSPF, BGP VRRP and is happy with it. This is very similar to what I am trying to do. I still feel a bit uneasy, but I think we will end up trusting the datasheet. Cheers to all, Bergonz -- Ing. Michele Bergonzoni - Laboratori Guglielmo Marconi S.p.a. Phone:+39-051-6781926 e-mail: berg...@labs.it alt.advanced.networks.design.configure.operate ___ 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/ ___ 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] Is the Nexus 3064PQ usable ?
Cisco tries to tell us the same thing. We think it has a lot to do with the fact they're competing with themselves campus vs datacenter, and this is a much cheaper option with better scale. We are using 5672s and larger for core / distro and cisco howeled about how its for datacenter and we should use the 68s as well. -Blake On Jun 12, 2014 10:38 AM, "Antoine Monnier" wrote: > Thanks Michele for sharing the feedback you received on this. > > > Our cisco sales rep is telling us that he has never heard of Nexus used as > a campus distribution-layer and is trying to convince us that that Catalyst > 6807 is the right choice (instead of Nexus 56128P), even though we would > get less 10Gig port-density, 1:2 oversubscription, 5x more RU used, at > least twice the power consumption, etc... and all of this for twice the > price! > > Are there other people out there using Nexus (3x00 ? 5x00? 6x00 7x00?) at > the distribution-layer of medium-sized campus? > Medium-sized being about 60 access-layer closets with dual 10 Gig uplink > each and a small server-farm. > > > On the downside I hear that the "orphan port" scenario with vPC may be a > pain in the back side? I still need to read the details of this. > Is anyone running vPC at the distribution-layer of a campus environment? > > > Thanks > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Michele Bergonzoni > wrote: > > > Does anybody have success/horror stories about the [Nexus] 3064 or 3048 > to > >> > >> share? If you email me in private, I can post an anonimized summary. > >> > > > > I received two very helpful replies. > > > > One person told me about some new 3172PQ: "I am loving them to death". > > This person is using them as L2, with vPC. > > > > One person is using the 3064X with OSPF, BGP VRRP and is happy with it. > > This is very similar to what I am trying to do. > > > > I still feel a bit uneasy, but I think we will end up trusting the > > datasheet. > > > > Cheers to all, > > > > Bergonz > > > > -- > > Ing. Michele Bergonzoni - Laboratori Guglielmo Marconi S.p.a. > > Phone:+39-051-6781926 e-mail: berg...@labs.it > > alt.advanced.networks.design.configure.operate > > ___ > > 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/ > ___ 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] Is the Nexus 3064PQ usable ?
Plenty of people are using them in data centers with ToR switches which you could consider a very similar design. Cisco just has a different team for "campus" vs "datacenter" for whatever reason so they work with different products. Most campuses used 6500s so they are familiar with IOS, VSS maybe and that's why they propose the 6800. Nexus is a new OS to learn, has some different redundancy models, etc. I can't see any reason why the 5K wouldn't work. Maybe check into longer reach optics support if that is necessary. High density low power datacenter switches don't always support longer reach optics, but I'm not sure about the 56128. Phil -Original Message- From: "Antoine Monnier" Sent: 6/12/2014 11:38 AM To: "Michele Bergonzoni" ; "cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net" Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Is the Nexus 3064PQ usable ? Thanks Michele for sharing the feedback you received on this. Our cisco sales rep is telling us that he has never heard of Nexus used as a campus distribution-layer and is trying to convince us that that Catalyst 6807 is the right choice (instead of Nexus 56128P), even though we would get less 10Gig port-density, 1:2 oversubscription, 5x more RU used, at least twice the power consumption, etc... and all of this for twice the price! Are there other people out there using Nexus (3x00 ? 5x00? 6x00 7x00?) at the distribution-layer of medium-sized campus? Medium-sized being about 60 access-layer closets with dual 10 Gig uplink each and a small server-farm. On the downside I hear that the "orphan port" scenario with vPC may be a pain in the back side? I still need to read the details of this. Is anyone running vPC at the distribution-layer of a campus environment? Thanks On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Michele Bergonzoni wrote: > Does anybody have success/horror stories about the [Nexus] 3064 or 3048 to >> >> share? If you email me in private, I can post an anonimized summary. >> > > I received two very helpful replies. > > One person told me about some new 3172PQ: "I am loving them to death". > This person is using them as L2, with vPC. > > One person is using the 3064X with OSPF, BGP VRRP and is happy with it. > This is very similar to what I am trying to do. > > I still feel a bit uneasy, but I think we will end up trusting the > datasheet. > > Cheers to all, > > Bergonz > > -- > Ing. Michele Bergonzoni - Laboratori Guglielmo Marconi S.p.a. > Phone:+39-051-6781926 e-mail: berg...@labs.it > alt.advanced.networks.design.configure.operate > ___ > 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/ ___ 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] Is the Nexus 3064PQ usable ?
Thus spake Antoine Monnier (mrantoinemonn...@gmail.com) on Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 01:59:01PM +0200: > Thanks Michele for sharing the feedback you received on this. > > > Our cisco sales rep is telling us that he has never heard of Nexus used as > a campus distribution-layer and is trying to convince us that that Catalyst > 6807 is the right choice (instead of Nexus 56128P), even though we would > get less 10Gig port-density, 1:2 oversubscription, 5x more RU used, at > least twice the power consumption, etc... and all of this for twice the > price! We have nexus 5k's and 7k's at the distribution layer for exactly these reasons (well, and cat6.8k wasn't available at the time). Only downside may be anemic buffering, but we keep a keen eye on packet loss. Dale ___ 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] Is the Nexus 3064PQ usable ?
Thanks Michele for sharing the feedback you received on this. Our cisco sales rep is telling us that he has never heard of Nexus used as a campus distribution-layer and is trying to convince us that that Catalyst 6807 is the right choice (instead of Nexus 56128P), even though we would get less 10Gig port-density, 1:2 oversubscription, 5x more RU used, at least twice the power consumption, etc... and all of this for twice the price! Are there other people out there using Nexus (3x00 ? 5x00? 6x00 7x00?) at the distribution-layer of medium-sized campus? Medium-sized being about 60 access-layer closets with dual 10 Gig uplink each and a small server-farm. On the downside I hear that the "orphan port" scenario with vPC may be a pain in the back side? I still need to read the details of this. Is anyone running vPC at the distribution-layer of a campus environment? Thanks On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Michele Bergonzoni wrote: > Does anybody have success/horror stories about the [Nexus] 3064 or 3048 to >> >> share? If you email me in private, I can post an anonimized summary. >> > > I received two very helpful replies. > > One person told me about some new 3172PQ: "I am loving them to death". > This person is using them as L2, with vPC. > > One person is using the 3064X with OSPF, BGP VRRP and is happy with it. > This is very similar to what I am trying to do. > > I still feel a bit uneasy, but I think we will end up trusting the > datasheet. > > Cheers to all, > > Bergonz > > -- > Ing. Michele Bergonzoni - Laboratori Guglielmo Marconi S.p.a. > Phone:+39-051-6781926 e-mail: berg...@labs.it > alt.advanced.networks.design.configure.operate > ___ > 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] ME3800: Error on delete SVI with MPLS enabled
Hi All, Just wanted to quickly testing if MPLS is supported over an SVI on an ME3800 running 15.3(3).S, I got this error when deleting the SVI agian, anyone seen this, anything to be worried about do you think? http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=dp9xYFwi The interface is gone from "show ip int br". Cheers, James. ___ 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/
