Re: [c-nsp] ASR920 Port Licensing
I refuse to buy in to ’Smart Licensing’ and ‘Port Licensing’. So far, we have been able to avoid buying from vendors who practice such anti-customer policies. I refuse to buy products with licensing schemes that require the equipment to ‘phone home’ or where a vendor through an error could remotely disable feature sets or the unit itself. (License keys, as implemented prior to IOS V15 are tolerable) I’m willing to purchase equipment from a vendor that is not as spiffy as J or C as long as it has an acceptable licensing policy and functionally works. That means we don’t get the nifty command language of Juniper with commit/rollback… I also refuse to purchase equipment that requires an ‘app’ or GUI program to configure. I demand a 9 pin serial connector (or a Cisco pinout RJ45) and a CLI. I think customers ought to stick to their guns and refuse to buy equipment from vendors that try to push this crap. Joe Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications j...@via.net 650-207-0372 cell 650-213-1302 office 650-969-2124 fax > On Feb 24, 2021, at 3:42 AM, Shawn L wrote: > > Another member just sent a question about smart licensing, and it got me > thinking that I should post my current issue here and see if anyone has > seen this before, or if I'm crazy (or Cisco is). > > Last summer I purchased 6 ASR920-12SZ-D routers/switches. These are the > ones with 12 10-gig ports. Despite some initial weirdness, port issues, > etc. they've actually worked rather well for us. Last week, one of them > started randomly dropping offline. After investigation, Cisco replaced > it. Here's where the fun starts. > > It almost looks like Cisco changed the licensing model for these between > when we purchased them and when we received our RMA. Is that possible? > > All of our (I'll call them old) routers had the default port licenses and > an Advanced Metro license. All 12 ports are usable at 1 gig, and 4 will > operate at 10 gig. I have 5 that are running quite happily like this at > remote pops right now. > > On the new router that was sent, only 6 ports are operational. The other 6 > are disabled, and won't enable, giving me license error when I try. > Cisco's telling me that the licenses on both the new and old routers match, > so their job is done. > > I don't think I'm crazy (but if you are, would you know) -- I have the doc > from cisco when we originally purchased the routers showing what license > level did what, though interestingly it's no longer on Cisco's website. > The new version of said docs seem to indicate that Cisco is correct and > the default license gives you 6 ports. Which means I need to purchase an > additional license to make my new router behave like the one I RMA-ed. > > This is kind of a long story to ask the question but, does anyone know if > the licensing changed somehow? And if it did, what does that mean for the > routers we've already deployed? > > thanks > > Shawn > ___ > 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] Rehosting a perpetual CSR1000V license
We don’t buy anything that can’t be managed with a serial connection. That means no fancy web based guis. Licensing is in the same category… A piece of equipment has to do something extraordinary before we’d consider purchasing it, if it implements some sort of license key scheme. We’ve purchased Juniper M series routers in the past and were extremely happy with them (Hey! They actually did what Juniper said they would do without 2 or 3 rounds of hardware upgrades), but I was initially put off because there are license keys embedded in the base software. Then I realized that when the keys expired in 10 years, the boxes would be in the landfill by that time... Joe Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications j...@via.net 650-207-0372 cell 650-213-1302 office 650-969-2124 fax > On Jul 21, 2020, at 8:44 AM, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > On 21/Jul/20 17:34, Seth Mattinen wrote: > >> >> >> Someone jumped in and sent me an updated license. As far as why it >> can't be done online, I'm not sure. I haven't tried to rehost anything >> in a while. > > The joy of when things just work :-). > > We had to because we had some boxes fail in that period. Fair point, the > servers had been nearly 7 years old, so can't blame them. > > Nonetheless, glad you're back up and running. > > 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/ ___ 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] 3560 and QoS ?
I need to QoS SIP traffic on 60 vlans (per GigE port) on several GiGE ports. Can this be done in hardware on the 3560? If not, can you suggest another Cisco switch/router that can? Thanks, Joe ___ 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] Unified IOS (15.x) and feature based licensing model
As far as I'm concerned, license-key enforced feature sets are another reason to seriously look at other vendors. One of the main reasons we settled on using Cisco products 15 years ago was that you could manage their products with a laptop and a serial port. No GUI's, no client software required. | You may want to look at Cisco License Manager (www.cisco.com/go/clm) Suppose you're at a site and need to replace a defective router - and you have no internet access until it is replaced... Also, you *do* realize that CLM is a MS Windows app. There isn't a single windows machine in our company... Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications j...@via.net 650-207-0372 cell 650-213-1302 office 650-969-2124 fax On Mar 24, 2010, at 9:33 AM, Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists wrote: On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:43:52 + (GMT), you wrote: I haven't even looked into the ifs and hows of revoking them or transferring them to another box in the event of a hardware failure / swap-out. You may want to look at Cisco License Manager (www.cisco.com/go/clm) -A ___ 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] Cisco 2811 and WIC-1DSU-T1.
Don't forget that with the V2 card you must explicitly specify channel speed to be 64K in order for bring up a T1. It's no longer the default... Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED] 650-207-0372 cell 650-213-1302 office 650-969-2124 fax On Apr 3, 2008, at 3:55 PM, Ben Mason wrote: I'm not sure i'd say better all the time, i had a recent issue where i had a circuit work in v1 card but not on a V2 card the v2 have less of a tolerance for poor wiring and some smartjack configs. On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Justin Shore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, and I was thinking I had a v1 working in an ISR too but I can't find one. V2s are better anyway. Justin virendra rode // wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Justin Shore wrote: I should have thought of that. :-( http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps5854/prod_qas0900aecd80169bd6.html Justin - --- Bummer because I thought I read somewhere that someone was able to force WIC-1DSU-T1 to function with 2811 under 124-11.XJ.bin. Maybe I misread. I'm sure I don't have a counterfeit WIC. WIC Slot 0: FT1 BT8360 WIC module not supported/disabled in this slot Hardware revision 1.3 Board revision E0 Serial number 28963342 Part number800-03279-04 FRU Part Number WIC-1DSU-T1= Test history 0x0 RMA number 00-00-00 Connector typeWan Module EEPROM format version 2 EEPROM contents (hex): 0x20: 02 11 01 03 01 B9 F2 0E 50 0C CF 04 00 00 00 00 0x30: 70 00 00 00 02 08 25 01 FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF regards, /virendra Ben Mason wrote: The WIC-1DSU-T1 is not supported in a 2811 you need to use a WIC-1DSU-T1-V2 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH9VQhpbZvCIJx1bcRAswlAJ9spygoboHg9gOY0QgT53M4yyx+IwCeIpKf 0I7zZFex8Unv10brhH9qaHQ= =BMcN -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- -- Ben email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://locutus.the-collective.net/ irc: su1droot; aim: su1droot; y!: su1droot ___ 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] Router uptime, can you beat it?
--- JUNOS 5.4-20021207-UCDJ3v built 2002-12-07 10:11:26 UTC show system uptime Current time: 2008-01-30 12:21:07 PST System booted: 2003-10-07 15:14:52 PDT (225w0d 22:06 ago) Protocols started: 2003-10-07 15:15:30 PDT (225w0d 22:05 ago) Last configured: 2008-01-24 15:23:29 PST (5d 20:57 ago) by buhrow 12:21PM up 1575 days, 22:06, 2 users, load averages: 3.88, 4.36, 4.08 Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED] 650-207-0372 cell 650-213-1302 office 650-969-2124 fax On Jan 29, 2008, at 4:05 PM, Ben Steele wrote: Just stumbled across a router in our network currently sitting at 1535 days of uptime, not to often you see that sort of uptime on a router these days, given this router does nothing important anymore though... in fact I think it's probably been forgot about, which is a good enough reason to let it sit there and try and become the god of uptime! :) Anyone got anything currently running longer? router uptime is 4 years, 10 weeks, 5 days, 9 hours, 13 minutes System returned to ROM by power-on System restarted at 14:27:52 ACDT Fri Nov 14 2003 System image file is flash:c2600-js-mz.122-17a.bin cisco 2620 (MPC860) processor (revision 0x102) with 61440K/4096K bytes of memory. Ben ___ 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] Cisco WIC-1DSU-T1-V2 + 2811 + 12.4(11)T ??
I can't get this combination to bring up a T1. Configured as encaps hdlc service-module t1 clock source line service-module t1 line b8zs service-module t1 frame esf service-module t1 timeslots all Indicator LED on WIC is green, with no alarms. Turning on debugging shows no keepalives seen: yourname#debug serial event Serial interface event debugging is on yourname#debug serial interface Serial network interface debugging is on yourname#debug serial packet Serial network packets debugging is on yourname# *Jan 23 22:30:23.227: DTE idb-dte_interface = DTE *Jan 23 22:30:23.227: Dscc4(Serial0/0/0): DCD is up. *Jan 23 22:30:25.227: %LINK-3-UPDOWN: Interface Serial0/0/0, changed state to up *Jan 23 22:30:26.227: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface Serial0/0/0, changed state to up *Jan 23 22:30:30.391: Serial0/0/0: HDLC myseq 0, mineseen 0, yourseen 0, line up *Jan 23 22:30:40.391: Serial0/0/0: HDLC myseq 1, mineseen 0, yourseen 0, line up *Jan 23 22:30:50.391: gt96k_mbrd_serial_mode_reg_init:: was DTE, now set to DTE *Jan 23 22:30:50.391: DTE idb-dte_interface = DTE *Jan 23 22:30:50.391: Dscc4(Serial0/0/0): DCD is up. *Jan 23 22:30:50.391: Serial0/0/0: HDLC myseq 2, mineseen 0, yourseen 0, line down *Jan 23 22:30:51.391: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface Serial0/0/0, changed state to down *Jan 23 22:31:00.391: Serial0/0/0: HDLC myseq 3, mineseen 0, yourseen 0, line down *Jan 23 22:31:10.391: Serial0/0/0: HDLC myseq 4, mineseen 0, yourseen 0, line down *Jan 23 22:31:20.391: Serial0/0/0: HDLC myseq 5, mineseen 0, yourseen 0, line down *Jan 23 22:31:21.391: Serial0/0/0: attempting to restart *Jan 23 22:31:21.391: gt96k_mbrd_serial_mode_reg_init:: was DTE, now set to DTE *Jan 23 22:31:21.391: DTE idb-dte_interface = DTE *Jan 23 22:31:21.391: Dscc4(Serial0/0/0): DCD is up. *Jan 23 22:31:30.391: Serial0/0/0: HDLC myseq 6, mineseen 0, yourseen 0, line down *Jan 23 22:31:40.391: Serial0/0/0: HDLC myseq 7, mineseen 0, yourseen 0, line down no deb all All possible debugging has been turned off If I plug the T1 circuit into a 1760 w- a V1 WIC-1DSU-T1, it comes right up... Any ideas?? Joe Joe McGuckin ViaNet Communications [EMAIL PROTECTED] 650-207-0372 cell 650-213-1302 office 650-969-2124 fax ___ 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/
