Re: [c-nsp] mVPN Rosen - S,G is not refreshed but *,G is

[Adam Baxter]

Hi,

So you have an active client sending an IGMP join on south ? Does the
Stream work on south ?



On 24 May 2016 at 23:52, Mattias Gyllenvarg  wrote:

> Dear All
>
> Any input is greatly appreciated!
>
> I have two PE ME3600X where one is RP (North) and one is has the customer
> link (South).
>
> North receives a set of TV streams that work perfect locally. But over the
> tunnel interface down to South SOME mroutes on North are not refreshed
> properly.
> The *,G is refreshed every minute or so but the S,G is not so it times-out
> and is recreated 3min later.
>
> Source [NORTH] ---  --- [South] --- pim --- [vanilla 6500] -
> Users
>
> From North:
>
> sh ip mroute vrf Foo-Barf 
>
> (*, M.C.S.T), 02:00:47/00:03:10, RP , flags: S
>   Incoming interface: Null, RPF nbr 0.0.0.0
>   Outgoing interface list:
> Vlan3713, Forward/Sparse, 02:00:47/00:02:47
> Tunnel2, Forward/Sparse, 00:47:09/00:03:10
>
> (U.C.S.T, M.C.S.T), 02:00:36/00:10:53, flags: MT
>   Incoming interface: Vlan1112, RPF nbr , Mroute
>   Outgoing interface list:
> Vlan3713, Forward/Sparse, 02:00:36/00:02:47
> Tunnel2, Forward/Sparse, 00:02:19/00:01:12
>
>
> 
>
> Both boxes are running 15.3-3.S3 and are freshly rebooted.
>
> I have not found any bug to match the behavior.
> ___
> 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] mVPN Rosen - S,G is not refreshed but *,G is

[Mattias Gyllenvarg]

Dear All

Any input is greatly appreciated!

I have two PE ME3600X where one is RP (North) and one is has the customer
link (South).

North receives a set of TV streams that work perfect locally. But over the
tunnel interface down to South SOME mroutes on North are not refreshed
properly.
The *,G is refreshed every minute or so but the S,G is not so it times-out
and is recreated 3min later.

Source [NORTH] ---  --- [South] --- pim --- [vanilla 6500] -
Users

>From North:

sh ip mroute vrf Foo-Barf 

(*, M.C.S.T), 02:00:47/00:03:10, RP , flags: S
  Incoming interface: Null, RPF nbr 0.0.0.0
  Outgoing interface list:
Vlan3713, Forward/Sparse, 02:00:47/00:02:47
Tunnel2, Forward/Sparse, 00:47:09/00:03:10

(U.C.S.T, M.C.S.T), 02:00:36/00:10:53, flags: MT
  Incoming interface: Vlan1112, RPF nbr , Mroute
  Outgoing interface list:
Vlan3713, Forward/Sparse, 02:00:36/00:02:47
Tunnel2, Forward/Sparse, 00:02:19/00:01:12




Both boxes are running 15.3-3.S3 and are freshly rebooted.

I have not found any bug to match the behavior.
___
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] MPLS route reflectors

[Roland Dobbins]

On 25 Apr 2016, at 16:56, Mark Tinka wrote:

> If you were greenfielding an RR, I'd not go physical in 2016.

+1

---
Roland Dobbins 
___
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] WS-X6708-10G-3CXL on CISCO7606-S

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 10:48:47AM +0200, Divo Zito wrote:
> chassis per slot cooling capacity: 91 cfm

You're good.

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
   //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de


signature.asc
Description: PGP 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/

Re: [c-nsp] MPLS route reflectors

[Mark Tinka]

On 24/May/16 10:20, Gert Doering wrote:

> The G2 isn't *that* bad... :-) - but an ASR1k would indeed run circles
> around it, as would a CSR1000v on a decent current server.

Agree.

The NPE-G2 used to be my RR of choice as well, until I met the CSR1000v.

Mark.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital 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/

Re: [c-nsp] MPLS route reflectors

[Mark Tinka]

On 24/May/16 10:13, Mohammad Khalil wrote:


> Thanks all , so the best option to follow is either ASR1001-X or CSR1000v 
> right?
> AS well , will Cisco VXR7206 NPE-2G will be of good choice?

CSR1000v - more CPU, more RAM, than you'll ever need.

Mark.
___
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] WS-X6708-10G-3CXL on CISCO7606-S

[Divo Zito]

Hello,

I have read about some cooling issues [1] with WS-X6708-10G-3CXL linecard 
on some 7600/6500 chassis. I'm planning to install one of these cards on my 
box (see below) but I could not find a clear statement of compatibility 
between them, so I would like to ask if someone of you here is running my 
same configuration.



  CISCO7606-S

  FAN-MOD-6SHS

  PWR-2700-AC

  PWR-2700-AC

  SUP720-3BXL

  WS-F6700-CFC

  WS-X6724-SFP

I know it will run in PFC 3BXL mode but I'm mostly concerned about its 
cooling requirements.


This is the output of my 'show environment cooling':


#show environment cooling

fan-tray 1:

  fan-tray 1 type: FAN-MOD-6SHS

  fan-tray 1 mode: Auto

  fan-tray 1 fan-fail: OK

chassis per slot cooling capacity: 91 cfm

ambient temperature: < 55C

  module 1 cooling requirement: 70 cfm

  module 5 cooling requirement: 35 cfm


Thanks,


1] https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/2014-March/095451.html

DZ


___
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] MPLS route reflectors

[Sander Steffann]

Hi,

> Got you Sander :)
> But I think CSR1000V will do what I need because it looks like a PC right ? :)

Right :)  If that is what your customer can manage then go for that.
Sander



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] MPLS route reflectors

[Mohammad Khalil]

Thanks Gert :)

BR,

> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 10:20:08 +0200
> From: g...@greenie.muc.de
> To: san...@steffann.nl
> CC: eng_m...@hotmail.com; g...@greenie.muc.de; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS route reflectors
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 10:14:31AM +0200, Sander Steffann wrote:
> > > AS well , will Cisco VXR7206 NPE-2G will be of good choice?
> > 
> > Please read the "fast CPU and lots of memory" bit again...
> 
> The G2 isn't *that* bad... :-) - but an ASR1k would indeed run circles
> around it, as would a CSR1000v on a decent current server.
> 
> gert
> -- 
> USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
>//www.muc.de/~gert/
> Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
> fax: +49-89-35655025g...@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/

Re: [c-nsp] MPLS route reflectors

[Mohammad Khalil]

Got you Sander :)
But I think CSR1000V will do what I need because it looks like a PC right ? :)

BR,

> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS route reflectors
> From: san...@steffann.nl
> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 10:18:05 +0200
> CC: g...@greenie.muc.de; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> To: eng_m...@hotmail.com
> 
> > Sorry Sander , I did but am just trying to evaluate what my customer 
> > already have in stock
> 
> They don't have a PC with a decent amount of CPU and memory? Look further 
> than router hardware :-)  Router hardware is good at forwarding packets, 
> which is the opposite of what you need.
> 
> Cheers,
> Sander
> 
  
___
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] MPLS route reflectors

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 10:14:31AM +0200, Sander Steffann wrote:
> > AS well , will Cisco VXR7206 NPE-2G will be of good choice?
> 
> Please read the "fast CPU and lots of memory" bit again...

The G2 isn't *that* bad... :-) - but an ASR1k would indeed run circles
around it, as would a CSR1000v on a decent current server.

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
   //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de


signature.asc
Description: PGP 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/

Re: [c-nsp] MPLS route reflectors

[Sander Steffann]

> Sorry Sander , I did but am just trying to evaluate what my customer already 
> have in stock

They don't have a PC with a decent amount of CPU and memory? Look further than 
router hardware :-)  Router hardware is good at forwarding packets, which is 
the opposite of what you need.

Cheers,
Sander



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] MPLS route reflectors

[Mohammad Khalil]

Sorry Sander , I did but am just trying to evaluate what my customer already 
have in stock

> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS route reflectors
> From: san...@steffann.nl
> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 10:14:31 +0200
> CC: g...@greenie.muc.de; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> To: eng_m...@hotmail.com
> 
> > Thanks all , so the best option to follow is either ASR1001-X or CSR1000v 
> > right?
> > AS well , will Cisco VXR7206 NPE-2G will be of good choice?
> 
> Please read the "fast CPU and lots of memory" bit again...
> 
  
___
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] MPLS route reflectors

[Sander Steffann]

> Thanks all , so the best option to follow is either ASR1001-X or CSR1000v 
> right?
> AS well , will Cisco VXR7206 NPE-2G will be of good choice?

Please read the "fast CPU and lots of memory" bit again...



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] MPLS route reflectors

[Mohammad Khalil]

Thanks all , so the best option to follow is either ASR1001-X or CSR1000v right?
AS well , will Cisco VXR7206 NPE-2G will be of good choice?

> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS route reflectors
> From: san...@steffann.nl
> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 10:03:20 +0200
> CC: eng_m...@hotmail.com; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> To: g...@greenie.muc.de
> 
> > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 10:53:50AM +0300, Mohammad Khalil wrote:
> >> I am limited to the below choices:
> >> ASR920 and ASR903 , what to choose?
> > 
> > Neither one is a particular BGP-RR-oriented platform.
> > 
> > What you want is something with a fast CPU and lots of memory, and you
> > don't care about interfaces, forwarding hardware, etc.
> 
> A.k.a. a PC :)
> Sander
> 
  
___
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] MPLS route reflectors

[Sander Steffann]

> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 10:53:50AM +0300, Mohammad Khalil wrote:
>> I am limited to the below choices:
>> ASR920 and ASR903 , what to choose?
> 
> Neither one is a particular BGP-RR-oriented platform.
> 
> What you want is something with a fast CPU and lots of memory, and you
> don't care about interfaces, forwarding hardware, etc.

A.k.a. a PC :)
Sander



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] MPLS route reflectors

[Mark Tinka]

On 24/May/16 09:53, Mohammad Khalil wrote:

> I am limited to the below choices:
> ASR920 and ASR903 , what to choose?

Neither.

Mark.

___
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] MPLS route reflectors

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 10:53:50AM +0300, Mohammad Khalil wrote:
> I am limited to the below choices:
> ASR920 and ASR903 , what to choose?

Neither one is a particular BGP-RR-oriented platform.

What you want is something with a fast CPU and lots of memory, and you
don't care about interfaces, forwarding hardware, etc.

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
   //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de


signature.asc
Description: PGP 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/

Re: [c-nsp] MPLS route reflectors

[Mohammad Khalil]

I am limited to the below choices:
ASR920 and ASR903 , what to choose?

BR,
Mohammad

> From: soltan...@gmail.com
> To: mkkai...@gmail.com; eng_m...@hotmail.com; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] MPLS route reflectors
> Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:51:49 +0430
> 
> Hi
> In addition of CSR1000v, Router C7200 Series are a good choice if 
> Route-Reflector is not in the path of traffic. We even used some lower 
> platforms such as C2800. 
> Another consideration is which AFI/SAFI you are going to use. Some of these 
> devices may not support some Address families for example pbb-evpn is only 
> supported on XR series. Pbb-evpn route-reflector is only supported on CSR1000v
> 
> Regards
> Alireza
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of ? 
> ??
> Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 1:08 PM
> To: Mohammad Khalil ; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS route reflectors
> 
> Hello Muhammad!
> If you use Cisco and can use Virtual Routers on network Cisco CSR1000v will 
> your best choise. Many guys from list will recomend it for you.
> 
> 2016-04-25 11:33 GMT+03:00 Mohammad Khalil :
> 
> > Hi all
> > I have MPLS network with OSPF as the underlying IGP , my current two 
> > route reflectors are ASR9010 The  current design is in-band route 
> > reflection , what am trying to implement is to pull out these two 
> > routers and use them as MPLS PE and change the route reflection model 
> > to out-of-band So , I want to use lower series (as am going with 
> > out-of-band) what are the most appropriate model/series to use/deploy?
> > Thanks
> > BR,
> > Mohammad
> > ___
> > 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/
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> *__*
> *С Уважением*
> *Каипов Мурат*
> 
> *тел: +7(940)9910142*
> 
> *e-mail: mkkai...@gmail.com *Человек, который придумает, 
> как бить людей в лицо через интернет, заработает миллионы.(с) 
> ___
> 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] asr9k dhcp relay + ipv4 verify unicast

[Florian Lohoff]

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 06:02:10PM +0300, Tarko Tikan wrote:
> hey,
> 
> > interface BVI60004
> >  ipv4 address 10.4.5.1 255.255.255.0
> >  ipv4 verify unicast source reachable-via rx allow-self-ping
> 
> Is this actual config or simplified? If simplified, is there
> VRRP/HSRP involved?
> 
> If there is, it can be explained by DHCP return packet hitting other
> router (because it's sent to GIADDR but you only announce your
> connected prefix). Other router then fails to send packet to
> original router via connected interface because from other routers
> POV it fails RPF (saddr: dhcp-server, daddr: giaddr).

Thanks - thats it ... hsrp + ipv4 verify bit me again ...

Its simplyfied - there is HSRP but the giaddr is the interfaces address
not the HSRP address - so it would get routed back to the original
partner - But indeed that might be the reason the OFFER gets dropped.

And yes - hitting the HSRP partner first so it'l be put on that
L3 domain as its connected and the partner will drop it - bah.

Now looking for a workaround - announcing the HSRP partners interface
addresses as /32 seems to be the only real solution.

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de
 UTF-8 Test: The  ran after a , but the  ran away


signature.asc
Description: Digital 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/