On 03/15/2011 10:08 PM, Peter Rathlev wrote:
On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 17:56 +, Phil Mayers wrote:
On 03/15/2011 04:40 PM, Robert Hass wrote:
For RR (BGP, IS-IS) IP Base is just fine. You don't need DATA license.
These are RRs for MPLS VPN, as was the OPs request - I think you need
DATA for
Hi,
Looking at the output of sh policy-map interface Te0/1/2/0.52 output, I
can see Matched and Transmitted packets in premium class is same but policed
(confirmed) packets are more. It should be same.
RP/0/RP0/CPU0:crs1.rtr#sh policy-map interface Te0/1/2/0.52 output
Wed Mar 16 01:25:47.318
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 11:20:17PM +0100, Peter Rathlev wrote:
Other than that I'm not sure what the problem is, simply because I have
very little experience with IPv6[0]. Can anyone elaborate on that part?
Is it related to multi-topology or some other (for me) strange things?
Pardon me
Hi All,
Another issue i am seeing on 7206
setup looks like Spirent 12k XR --(10 gig link)--- CRS1 ---(10 gig
link)- (l2 switch) --(1 gig link) 7206 npeG1 Spirent
I have shaper on CRS1 towards 7206 which shape 10gig to 300 mbps
RP/0/RP0/CPU0:crs1.rtr#sh run int Te0/1/2/0.52
Hi. Guys
What is the lowest switch?
I heard C4900M is low latency switch
Do you know any other vender?
Please let me know.
Thanks
Soon Lee
CCIE# 17724
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
On Wed, 2011-03-16 at 18:02 +0900, Soon Lee wrote:
What is the lowest switch?
The one at the bottom of the rack? ;-)
I heard C4900M is low latency switch
Do you know any other vender?
Please let me know.
I guess the standard Cisco answer to low latency would be the
cut-through switching
Hi
Lowest latency switch hahaha.
according to this
document(http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/switches/ps5718/ps6021/stac_report_cisco_catalyst_4900m_10gige_switch.pdf)
Latency of C4900M is 19 microseconds.
I'm looking for any other vender switch which is low latency switch.
If you guys inform
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Phil Mayers p.may...@imperial.ac.uk wrote:
Hmm. I definitely came away with the idea you needed DATA, but I can't
remember why; which of course makes the conclusion suspect!
If someone have working config. I can apply it to our of our 2900s in the LAB.
We will
Ciscos lowest latency box is the nexus 3000..
On Mar 16, 2011 8:17 AM, Soon Lee leekor...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
Lowest latency switch hahaha.
according to this document(
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/switches/ps5718/ps6021/stac_report_cisco_catalyst_4900m_10gige_switch.pdf
)
Latency of
Can I get any document what you say?
Thanks
Soon Lee
CCIE# 17724
From: Chris Evans [mailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 9:24 PM
To: Soon Lee
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net; Peter Rathlev
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] What is the lowest latency switch?
Ciscos
Talk to your se.. it's due out by end of April.
On Mar 16, 2011 8:41 AM, Soon Lee leekor...@gmail.com wrote:
Can I get any document what you say?
Thanks
Soon Lee
CCIE# 17724
From: Chris Evans [mailto:chrisccnpsp...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 9:24 PM
To: Soon Lee
Hi,
What about H3C 3com S5820X ?
May be renamed or renumbered to hp procurve,
but spec says:
...
Additionally, in order to reduce
latency in the network core or data center environment, the
S5820X features cut-through switching as well as store and
forward mode switching.
...
Forwarding
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 18:02:34 +0900, you wrote:
I heard C4900M is low latency switch
In almost all real-world scenarios, any dropped frame affects
performance almost infinitely more than the latency of any switch
between the two hosts. Don't *just* look at latency.
That being said: The Nexus
No, you can get documentation on it. It's not even an officially announced
product yet. It's supposed to be for ultra-low latency financial applications.
Cisco hasn't said anything about it yet. A good article to read about it is on
network world...
This new network switch is the 3ks which are based on merchant silicon. Its
a stop gap solution until they spin their own. I believe its based on the
broadcom Trident chipset that other vendors such as bnt juniper and arista
are using..
They are due out by end if April for fcs I believe.
On Mar
Guys,
I´m trying to replace one 6509 with sup7203bxl to 7600 with RSP720-3cxl, but
I´m getting strange cpu usage behavior.
With a very few traffic, about 400Mb, I got the router consuming much more
cpu, due interrupts, than sup7203bxl.
We are using SRE3, but also tried SRC6 and SRB7.
The
On Mar 16, 2011, at 10:51 PM, Raphael Costa wrote:
With a very few traffic, about 400Mb, I got the router consuming much more
cpu, due interrupts, than sup7203bxl.
This likely means traffic's being punted. Do sh proc c | e 0.00, and sh fm sum.
You can configure up to 16 HSRP Standby Groups on a Sup2/PFC2
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 16:12:28 +1100
From: a...@jonesy.com.au
To: mack.mcbr...@viawest.com
CC: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] sup2 VRRP/HSRP limits
Thanks Mack,
Does anyone have an information on how many
Roland,
Thanks for your quickly response.
See bellow:
Router#sh proc c | e 0.00
CPU utilization for five seconds: 16%/14%; one minute: 9%; five minutes: 4%
PID Runtime(ms) Invoked uSecs 5Sec 1Min 5Min TTY Process
74 404 216 1870 1.67% 0.37% 0.09% 1
I'm trying to find a matching bug id for this situation:
The LDP session over MLPPP goes down if the MLPPP bundle is congested and at
least one of the ML members goes down.
I found something similar but that only affects the 2941:
+
CSCtc31618 Bug Details
2941:
On Mar 16, 2011, at 11:18 PM, Raphael Costa wrote:
Thanks for your quickly response.
TCAM isn't overflowed, doesn't look like traffic's being punted.
Maybe someone's packeting your box. You have iACLs and/or CoPP in place?
As long as you are exploring other vendors, look at Arista and Juniper.
On 3/16/11 9:07 AM, Jürgen Marenda j...@ilk.net wrote:
Hi,
What about H3C 3com S5820X ?
May be renamed or renumbered to hp procurve,
but spec says:
...
Additionally, in order to reduce
latency in the network core or
show ibc | i rate is also useful here
Kind regards,
Sibbi
On 16.3.2011 16:26, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote:
On Mar 16, 2011, at 11:18 PM, Raphael Costa wrote:
Thanks for your quickly response.
TCAM isn't overflowed, doesn't look like traffic's being punted.
Maybe
Hi,
What about H3C 3com S5820X ?
May be renamed or renumbered to hp procurve,
but spec says:
...
Additionally, in order to reduce
latency in the network core or data center environment, the
S5820X features cut-through switching as well as store and
forward mode switching.
...
No, just basic bgp and ipv4 routing.
See the configuration bellow:
Router#sh run
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 5965 bytes
!
! Last configuration change at 15:19:59 UTC Wed Mar 16 2011
!
version 12.2
service timestamps debug datetime msec
service timestamps log datetime msec
I've just inherited a plant with a few dozen WS-C2950-EI doing access
duty - an apartment complex. We've had just ridiculous stuff, like certain
models of customer NAT device that will helpfully reforward an unknown
unicast frame(!), and I've pretty well had my fill of Windows antics on this
I'm assuming by apartment complex you mean just internet access for users
and no LAN is required. Have you tried the usual sources like Cmyru and
cisco. I know Cymru has some pretty good templates for general device
hardening and cisco is trying to take over the world these days. One
suggestion
Router#show ibc | i rate
5 minute rx rate 2031000 bits/sec, 3633 packets/sec
5 minute tx rate 4765000 bits/sec, 7262 packets/sec
2011/3/16 Sigurbjörn B. Lárusson sigurbjo...@vodafone.is
show ibc | i rate is also useful here
Kind regards,
Sibbi
On 16.3.2011 16:26, Dobbins,
Customers don't have access to native VLAN, I clipped that bit from the
config, didn't seem relevant. Overall this network is too open.
I've seen 2950s just melt down when small dumb access switch on the far
end had one cable plugged into two ports - 99.44% usage no way to gain
remote access.
We are using these switches for more them a year with almost no issues
It is very stable as L2 and basic L3 (including GRE at line rate ) I didnt
test the MPLS yet
The latest version R1206 add a lot of features and at last you can do |
include ... in any command and you can see drops on the
Guys,
Definitely there is something really wrong. :-)
The router stoped consuming cpu due interrupts.
The only thing that I've changed was, changed uplink interface from 5/2 to
4/48 on the fly. After that the router began responding well.
So, to check again, I came the cable back to 5/2. And
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Neal Rauhauser neal.rauhau...@gmail.comwrote:
Customers don't have access to native VLAN, I clipped that bit from the
config, didn't seem relevant. Overall this network is too open.
I think it saves you from the more malicious happenings like vlan hopping
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Peter Rathlev pe...@rathlev.dk wrote:
On Wed, 2011-03-16 at 14:21 -0500, Neal Rauhauser wrote:
I've seen 2950s just melt down when small dumb access switch on the
far end had one cable plugged into two ports - 99.44% usage no way to
gain remote access. Will
After a router reload:
Router#ps
CPU utilization for five seconds: 18%/17%; one minute: 19%; five minutes:
14%
PID Runtime(ms) Invoked uSecs 5Sec 1Min 5Min TTY Process
2 12 85141 0.00% 0.01% 0.00% 0 Load Meter
83848 213
I've got a 6509e that PoE doesn't seem to be working on, it's completely
possibly that I'm missing something but I can't seem to figure out what it
could be.
I've got a wireless base station that was plugged into a 3750G-PoE working
great, and I'm attempting to move it over to a WS-X6548-GE-TX
Shows power operational status as Off :-)
Here ya go:
core-sw1#show power inline module 3
Interface Admin OperPower(Watts) Device Class
Police ActualConsumption
From PSTo Device
- -- --
The only reason that was in there was a feeble attempt to nudge it towards on,
I see the same affect whether it's there or no. It should be noted that this
isn't a Cisco AP on the other end, don't see how that should be important
though since it works well on a 3750.
core-sw1#show running int
I am trying to configure my ASR 1006 to use TACACS+ via my vrf interface, which
is my gigabitethernet 0 interface. We use this only for management. I can
ping the TAC server from my vrf, but it will not authenticate against it. Here
is what I have-
interface GigabitEthernet0
vrf forwarding
Hi Wil,
That inline power daughter card only supports Cisco proprietary inline
power detection, it doesn't support 802.3af. Do you know if the
wireless controller supports Cisco proprietary?
Regards,
Jim
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
Ahh, here's the problem. There are 2 voice daughterboard for that card.
WS-F6K-VPWR-GE (which you have)
And
WS-F6K-48-AF
The one you have is only capable of supplying Class 1 (7.0W). The WAP
most likely needs class 3 power (15.4W), and not able to come up.
If I remember right under the tacacs server configuration you need to tell
it to use the vrf. This might be under the server group also.
On Mar 16, 2011 5:34 PM, Judith Sanders jasand...@ptci.com wrote:
I am trying to configure my ASR 1006 to use TACACS+ via my vrf interface,
which is my
Whelp, there's my luck for ya. :-)
Thanks!
On Mar 16, 2011, at 2:29 PM, Matlock, Kenneth L wrote:
Ahh, here's the problem. There are 2 voice daughterboard for that card.
WS-F6K-VPWR-GE (which you have)
And
WS-F6K-48-AF
The one you have is only capable of supplying Class 1 (7.0W). The
Ok, why do you have the 'power inline static' in there? By default the
ports don't need any special config to get PoE. It may be needing Class
3 (15.4W) and only able to supply Class 1 (7.0W) with that config line
in there.
Try taking that command off the port config.
Ken Matlock
Network Analyst
This is how we templated it:
Note the use of server-private, with ip vrf forwarding and ip tacacs source
interface under the aaa group server block.
!TEMPLATE: Standard_AAA_IOS VERSION 2.1
#
#$USE_VRF Management VRF Does this device use a VRF for management?
select no yes
#IF $USE_VRF yes
If I remember right under the tacacs server configuration you
need to tell
it to use the vrf. This might be under the server group also.
Like this (on 876W):
!
aaa new-model
aaa authentication login default group custaaa local-case
aaa authentication enable default group custaaa enable
aaa
Hello Judith,
Please follow the below link which mentions what Chris covered below:-
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/asr1000/configuration/guide/chassis/Management_Ethernet.html#wp1059079
Hope this helps.
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
What does a 'show power inline g3/5' show?
Ken Matlock
Network Analyst
Exempla Healthcare
(303) 467-4671
matlo...@exempla.org
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Wil Schultz
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Changing the config won't help the situation. The card can't tell that
there is a powered device connected so it won't apply power.
Jim
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Matlock, Kenneth
L
Sent: Wednesday,
Juniper qfx3500 is tested at 1usec (store and forward) and rated 4 watts
for 10ge. Have a look if you are interested.
Magno
Il giorno 16/mar/2011 21:16, Nitzan Tzelniker nitzan.tzelni...@gmail.com
ha scritto:
We are using these switches for more them a year with almost no issues
It is very
Try turning off ip unreachables on the interfaces themselves, with no ip
unreachables, and see if that changes the CPU usage
Kind regards,
Sibbi
On 16.3.2011 20:10, Raphael Costa raphaelbsco...@gmail.com wrote:
Guys,
Definitely there is something really wrong. :-)
The router stoped
Estimados,
Tienen referencias sobre el Cisco ME 6524 Ethernet Switch. (part number
ME-C6524GT-8S)
Estoy evaluando comprar ese o un C6503-E con 1 Sup y 1 mod de 48 puertas
10/100/1000 Ethernet.
Más que nada como nodo de contingencia a la capa de distribución.
Ya tengo un C6503 como nodo principal
The qfx3500 looks great on paper. However there are a lot of features that
aren't supported at FCS.. One big one such as Layer 3 functionality, its not
supported until Q3.
The QFX3500 also uses the same merchant silicon that the Nexus 3K uses..
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 7:06 PM, magno
Hi ,
please suggest us that how to configure ISDL line and lease line .thanks.
regards
Bhupendra Singh
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at
53 matches
Mail list logo
