No, no ACLs with logging option configured at all.
Regarding the commmand, I tried before I sent the email to the list and...
#sh proc cpu sort
^
% Invalid input detected at '^' marker.
So it is not supported so far.
Anyway I took note about this process:
50
HI,
MTU is 1500 on both devices.
Regards
Daljit Singh
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of harbor235
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 10:35 PM
To: Bunny Singh
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp]
Hi,
I don't have any idea reading IP Multicast Dat
But this is consuming only ~5% according to your report .
Can you post following output so we can isolate whether high cpu due to
packet interrupt or processes.
show proc cpu | exc 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%
CPU utilization for five seconds: 7%/2% *(
Hi,
yesterday, one of our customers tried to move two GigE-on-fiber circuits
from a Catalyst 4507 to a new Nexus 5548.
The other end terminates on some carrier gear (and is then multiplexed
in whatever ways across the city).
After moving the circuit, the link didn't come up on the Nexus, but
On 4/15/2011 1:07 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
yesterday, one of our customers tried to move two GigE-on-fiber circuits
from a Catalyst 4507 to a new Nexus 5548.
The other end terminates on some carrier gear (and is then multiplexed
in whatever ways across the city).
After moving the circuit,
testing in my lab now -- simple back to back copper over glc-t between
n5020 running 4.2(1)n2(1) and asr1002 running 3.1.0s
=
asr1002-1#sh run int gig 0/0/3
Building configuration...
Current configuration :
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 01:44:03PM -0700, quinn snyder wrote:
testing in my lab now -- simple back to back copper over glc-t between
n5020 running 4.2(1)n2(1) and asr1002 running 3.1.0s
Thanks for testing, but I'm afraid this won't bring new information -
copper GE and fiber GE is
dug through some kit -- found sfp-ge-s and a 62.5um cable.
same interfaces being used.
link came up for me. again -- this is with n5000, not n5500, but i
wouldn't think too great of a difference?
===
asr1002-1(config)#do sh run int gig 0/0/3
Building
On 4/15/2011 4:24 PM, quinn snyder wrote:
dug through some kit -- found sfp-ge-s and a 62.5um cable.
same interfaces being used.
link came up for me. again -- this is with n5000, not n5500, but i
wouldn't think too great of a difference?
Although the UPCs/ASICs are different (gatos vs carmel)
link came up for me. again -- this is with n5000, not n5500, but i
wouldn't think too great of a difference?
GigE support has been available for quite some time on the N5000, but
only recently added to N5500:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/datacenter/nexus5000/sw/release
I don't think fiber negotiates. It isn't usually capable of anything but
gig-full. Are you sure the carrier is using 1g fiber. Carriers are always
provisioning 100m smf interfaces for low-cap connections if you don't tell them
otherwise. I had a few customers get bitten by this.
Sent from
On 04/16/2011 12:48 AM, Keegan Holley wrote:
I don't think fiber negotiates. It isn't usually capable of anything
but gig-full. Are you sure the carrier is using 1g fiber. Carriers
Sigh.
The IEEE really did drop the ball on gig autoneg.
Maybe someone will make a fibre hub!
Fibre gigE can
12 matches
Mail list logo
