Re: [c-nsp] QOS testing traffic generator and reporter

You may want to have a look at d-itg. I used it a few years ago when playing with QoS in training courses. Can't remember exactly what the capabilities are as haven't used it for a few years but I know it does both send and receive and has a reporting capability so it is worth a look. There

Re: [c-nsp] Cacti Monitoring Uptime Interface

Dear, please check the link below https://learningnetwork.cisco.com/thread/2134 BR, Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 13:14:38 +0800 From: mumet...@yahoo.co.id To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] Cacti Monitoring Uptime Interface Dear All, Currently I use cacti for monitoring the whole

[c-nsp] Counting IPv6 on 6500

All, As has been discussed elsewhere, the 6500/7600 platforms lie about IPv6 packet/byte counters due to ASIC limitations (BTW I am told that this is fixed in sup2T/PFC4/Earl8) I think this alternative approach works for a limited set of cases: class-map match-all QOS-ALL-IPV6 match

[c-nsp] MPLS

hi all how MPLS work? our upstream service provider is a MPLS (metro) provider; we as an ISP want to resell Fiber connction to two sites of our client? we r already connected to metro; anybody got any pointers to any docs/info/howtos/hardware involved as to this? appreciate ur suggestions thanks

[c-nsp] Cacti graph on same interface

I am using cacti for graphing my nodes on the interface and I have two graphs polling on the same interface but the graphs are different, what could be causing that Thank you in advance.. -- *alex* ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [c-nsp] Cacti graph on same interface

On 06/08/2011 09:26 AM, alex nyagah wrote: I am using cacti for graphing my nodes on the interface and I have two graphs polling on the same interface but the graphs are different, what could be causing that This isn't really a Cisco question.. best asked on a Cacti forum. But: One graph

Re: [c-nsp] Cacti graph on same interface

On 08/06/2011 10:15, Phil Mayers wrote: The first will never read 100mbit/sec. The second will read correctly, so if you're doing 100mbit/sec they'll look different. about 112mbit/sec. So if you see graphs pegged at ~112mbit/sec, you know you're running into a 32-bit counter limitation.

Re: [c-nsp] Cacti graph on same interface

On 06/08/2011 11:35 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote: On 08/06/2011 10:15, Phil Mayers wrote: The first will never read 100mbit/sec. The second will read correctly, so if you're doing 100mbit/sec they'll look different. about 112mbit/sec. So if you see graphs pegged at ~112mbit/sec, you know you're

Re: [c-nsp] Limiting Tacacs groups per device

You can use ACLs in tac_plus.conf, though I'm not certain exactly what you want to achieve. Here's an example configuration to peruse: http://ampere.rathlev.dk/tac_plus-example.conf Thanks the helps clear things a little bit. The only issue I have is the lower level engineers need full

Re: [c-nsp] Memory leak on in latest 12.0S on GSR? *Solved*

I use it in the lab all the time. I do recommend a quality flash disk. On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 00:50, Mack McBride mack.mcbr...@viawest.com wrote: We ran into a number of issues with the continuous writes killing the flash and other flash related issues. The other issue we ran into was

[c-nsp] Placing an Interface into a VRF Causes it to Become no passive Underneath v6 OSPF

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 All: On our 6500s running SXI5, I have noticed that whenever a vlan interface is assigned to a vrf, the interface is inserted as no passive-interface underneath our ipv6 ospf process. Does anyone know of a knob to turn this feature off? Thanks! -

[c-nsp] ip route null 0

hi all if i am running ospf and i am adverting /24 subnets without any summerization under the OSPF domain and static routes are for those /24 subnets are forwarded to another device is there a need to create a route for those subnets pointing to the null 0? Thanks

Re: [c-nsp] Limiting Tacacs groups per device

On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 11:45 +, Brian Raaen wrote: You can use ACLs in tac_plus.conf, though I'm not certain exactly what you want to achieve. Here's an example configuration to peruse: http://ampere.rathlev.dk/tac_plus-example.conf Thanks the helps clear things a little bit. The

[c-nsp] Internet Maintenance Traffic Manipulation

This post would be for those of you in a DC environment with multiple internet feeds. When carrier X emails about a 12:00 - 6:00 maintenance window for IOS upgrade, reboot, card swap, etc. are you influencing your eBGP traffic away from that carrier during the maintenance window? Alternative

Re: [c-nsp] Internet Maintenance Traffic Manipulation

Hi, we use combinations of prepending and pref to adjust traffic away from devices that we are going to work on. As long as you're using soft changes there shouldn't be any disruption. There will obviously be rerouting and you need to be mindful of congestion if you do redirect large blocks

Re: [c-nsp] Placing an Interface into a VRF Causes it to Become no passive Underneath v6 OSPF

Thus spake Devon True (de...@noved.org) on Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 11:49:39AM -0400: On our 6500s running SXI5, I have noticed that whenever a vlan interface is assigned to a vrf, the interface is inserted as no passive-interface underneath our ipv6 ospf process. Does anyone know of a knob

[c-nsp] mlppp testing gear

Hi everyone - does anyone know of a MLPPP testing gear. I need to test the scalability of MLPPPoE/oA but have not find anything useful (Spirent does not support it for sure nor does the original Ixia. I'm checking if at least N2X arm of Ixia has something). Thanks, Marlon

[c-nsp] ebgp: route-map vs prefix list for outbound prefix filtering

Hi Are there any caveats to leveraging an outbound route-map for prefix filtering (on top of adding policy) to external peers, vs using a prefix filter as well as the route-map? The main objective here is to keep an additional (large) prefix list out of the config. I have to specify prefix

[c-nsp] 7600 PFC MPLS - Aggregate label disposition + L3 FIB lookup + imposition: workaround?

Hi, I have an MPLS network where some 7600 PEs (running 12.2(33)SRD) have the internet with full routing table in a VRF (I know many of you and the CPU don't like this), and I want to connect internet customers to small PEs that cannot take a full routing table. My current solution is to

Re: [c-nsp] Limiting Tacacs groups per device

On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 19:36 +0200, Peter Rathlev wrote: I tried fiddling with before authorization and after authorization but couldn't get it to work the way I wanted to. The after method seemed suitable until I realised that tac_plus never sends any AV pairs to the called script when

Re: [c-nsp] ip route null 0

If you still are not using those /24 blocks then its better to route those blocks to null0 otherwise its not necessarily required. Regards, Iftikhar Mehar Network Engineer Maxima 0787 2681 094 - Reply message - From: Mohammad Khalil eng_m...@hotmail.com To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [c-nsp] mlppp testing gear

Hey Marlon, Over what kind of Layer 2 interface are you planning to run MLPPP? I think Agilent N2X (Now IXIA N2X) can do PPPoE/PPPoA testing with appropriate software licences. However, with N2X you are limited to Ethernet and ATM/FR (STM-x/OC-x) interfaces. I do not know if they have any

Re: [c-nsp] ebgp: route-map vs prefix list for outbound prefix filtering

If I understand what you are trying to do that looks correct to me. This will permit region-3 without any modifications and then block everything that hasn't been matched. On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Eric Morin eric.mo...@corp.xplornet.com wrote: Hi Are there any caveats to leveraging an