On (2008-04-19 00:17 +0200), Christian Bering wrote:
But it doesn't really tell me if the bug would affect the PEs or the
route reflectors (or both).
Most likely culprit is one box doing something funny (not RR), and then
as it's propagated every box that has CSCeh77395 integrated will
Hi,
According to
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0s/feature/guide/cs_brmcs.html
the continue route-map statement is only supported in the outbound
direction when running 12.0(31)S and later. According to the Feature
Navigator, 12.2(33)SRB + SRC also supports it, but 12.2(18)SXF doesn't.
Hi Saku,
Most likely culprit is one box doing something funny (not RR), and then
as it's propagated every box that has CSCeh77395 integrated will
report it by crying wolf.
Alright. Thanks for your input.
--
Regards
Christian Bering
IP engineer, nianet a/s
Phone: (+45) 7020 8730
-
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at
Peter,
I would recommend testing it throughly in the lab and ensuring it is on
the checklist for things to retest before you do incremental upgrades as
I this is one feature I know sufferers from lack of consistency across
release trains.
While I dont use SX* so cant comment on its
On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 01:30:11PM +0200, Peter Rathlev wrote:
Hi,
According to
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0s/feature/guide/cs_brmcs.html
the continue route-map statement is only supported in the outbound
direction when running 12.0(31)S and later. According to the Feature
On Sat, 2008-04-19 at 14:33 -0500, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
Route-map outbound continue most definitely does not work in SXF, SXH,
or SRA. It causes everything to leak through the route-map regardless
of your matches, which is a very bad thing if you're applying it to a
transit or peer
got it.
thanks
yong
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 4/19/2008 4:34 AM
Send cisco-nsp mailing list submissions to
cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
or, via email, send a message with
On Friday 18 April 2008, Łukasz Bromirski wrote:
Please note, PA-GE was designed for connectivity before VIP4 was
released for 7500 so it's pretty old linecard.
PA-GE + VIP2-50 = GEIP, essentially. GEIP+ on 7500 is a VIP4-80 plus a dual
width PA, and does much better. But, then again, it has
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 02:42:16PM -0700, Buhrmaster, Gary wrote:
Cisco retired (is retiring) the GD/LD program
(ED and DF continue, MD is a new designation):
Still, I don't understand what the practical consequences are, except
that images aren't called GD/LD anymore, but MD (which never had
So, we can run Linux on the Cisco routers,
And we can run IOS on a Linux system
(http://dynagen.org/)
And, for an encore, we can proceed to prove
that white is black and get ourselves killed
at the next Zebra crossing.
There's some things that are just too stupid
to contemplate doing.
Ted
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
So, we can run Linux on the Cisco routers,
My understanding is that you run Linux on an x86 device connected to
your switch/router backplane. The NAM is a good example of an existing
Cisco product that fits this model.
Of course, Linux could probably run natively on
12 matches
Mail list logo
