Re: [c-nsp] NCS-5001 - sweet...got one in the lab
What is is "12.2SX vs. 12.2SR bullshit" all about? I never really understood the myriad of letters in the version numbers. I only know about the first letter being an S, T, or M. Met vriendelijke groet, Tom Marcoen Technisch consultant Valid Wilhelminasingel 107 6221 BH Maastricht T +31 (0)88 900 95 00 M +31 (0)6 525 026 50 www.valid.nl Dit bericht inclusief attachments is vertrouwelijk en uitsluitend bedoeld voor de geadresseerde(n). Indien dit bericht niet voor u bestemd is, verzoeken wij u vriendelijk dit bericht aan de afzender te retourneren en vervolgens te wissen. This message, including attachments, is confidential and intended for the addressee(s) only. If this message is not intended for you, please notify the sender by returning this e-mail immediately and delete this message. -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Gert Doering Sent: dinsdag 2 februari 2016 17:04 To: Nick Hilliard Cc: Gert Doering; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] NCS-5001 - sweet...got one in the lab Hi, On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 03:53:25PM +, Nick Hilliard wrote: > Gert Doering wrote: > > And yes, I'm fully aware that using EIGRP has lots of drawbacks, > > like, "vendor lock in" > > you mean "BU lock-in"? Vendor lock-in is old and busted. Is there a list of Cisco BUs and which product is messed up by whom? I would have expected that most of the "it is fast and has XR" stuff comes from the same BU (since every BU has to have their own OS anyway[*]), but seemingly that was naive. [*] now, one could argue that XR 6 qualifies for the "12.2SX vs. 12.2SR bullshit award 2016"... so it might well be a different BU, with different features, and more inter-BU bullshit. [**] BU-llshit??? 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] TFTP/SCP
> On 19/Nov/15 12:25, Harry Hambi - Atos wrote: > > Hi All, > Uploading IOS 15.2.SE7 to a number of 3750 switches using tftp. This proved > very slow, so I decided to use SCP which was a lot > quicker. However, SCP caused a cpu spike on the switch which caused snmp > drops. Has anyone ever experience this?, the switch > was passing data traffic normally. Although the suggestion from Alex Presse to use the -l flag is a very good tip, I was thinking about using control plane policing (CoPP) to limit SSH traffic on the switches. Anyone has any experience with this solution? ___ 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] ME3800X/ME3600X/ME3600X-24CX/ASR903/ASR901 Deployment Simplification Feedback
We're currently also using ASR9010 as core routers with ME3600X as the access "switches" but are now looking at replacing the ME3600X with ASR9000v extension shelfs. Does anyone have any experience with this setup? At first side it looks nice and (a bit) cheaper but I noticed the ASR9000v comes with 11-port increment licenses and does not have a redundant power supply. This last issue is show-stopper for us. Anyway, I would like to hear your views on the matter. Best regards Tom 2013/7/25 Mattias Gyllenvarg > Good point, SDM is just another gotcha. Allocate according to use and > complain in the log when your getting close to max. > > ME3600x + ASR9k FTW! Just make more physical variants of the ME and lower > the price on ASR9k. > ___ 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] ME3800X/ME3600X/ME3600X-24CX/ASR903/ASR901 Deployment Simplification Feedback
Mark That is a valid point but the company I work for already only uses Cisco for its routing/switching devices. So it's also a non-issue. Tom -Original Message- From: Mark Tinka [mailto:mark.ti...@seacom.mu] Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 11:56 To: Tom Marcoen; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ME3800X/ME3600X/ME3600X-24CX/ASR903/ASR901 Deployment Simplification Feedback On 17/Nov/15 12:49, Tom Marcoen wrote: > We're currently also using ASR9010 as core routers with ME3600X as the access > "switches" but are now looking at replacing the ME3600X with ASR9000v > extension shelfs. Does anyone have any experience with this setup? > > At first side it looks nice and (a bit) cheaper but I noticed the ASR9000v > comes with 11-port increment licenses and does not have a redundant power > supply. This last issue is show-stopper for us. > > Anyway, I would like to hear your views on the matter. Satellites lock you into vendor gear. Primary reason I stay away from satellites. 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/
