Hello list,
according what I read on a Sup720 I have:
-Switch processor DRAM
-Route processor DRAM
-Switch processor bootdisk
-Route processor bootdisk
I now want to find out what is installed and what is used (at least for
the DRAM).
with dir I get the SP bootdisk I think:
Directory of
I've recently started to explore the more interesting features of the
ME3600X platform and one of the things I have been looking at is
starting to provision customers using EVC type configuration, so I can
do vlan tag remapping and other nice things in the coming months.
Previously I've been
On Monday, November 14, 2011 05:37:18 PM Reuben Farrelly wrote:
sw1.qld(config-if)# ip address XXX.XXX.96.69
255.255.255.252 %IP address cannot be configured on
bridge domain 780 EFP Switchports or EFPs
sw1.qld(config-if)#
I dumped your configuration into two ME3600X's we
have running IOS
Reuben,
On the ME3600X you cannot have the same VLAN used as an SVI for Layer 3
bridge-domain on a service-instance, and at the same time also applied
as a regular allowed VLAN on a trunk or as the VLAN of an access port.
Check that VLAN780 is not allowed anywhere on the system (trunks and
Rolf,
Try:
7600-1#remote command switch show memory
HeadTotal(b) Used(b) Free(b) Lowest(b) Largest(b)
Processor 10070994 631968348 228349532 403618816 339854020 364588984
I/O 3C006710886443819664232892002307110823267580
On 14/11/2011 9:32 PM, Arie Vayner (avayner) wrote:
Reuben,
On the ME3600X you cannot have the same VLAN used as an SVI for Layer 3
bridge-domain on a service-instance, and at the same time also applied
as a regular allowed VLAN on a trunk or as the VLAN of an access port.
Check that VLAN780
Hrm, it's going to be fun to retrospectively restrict trunk ports on
both ends all through the network to get around this. Maybe EVC's just
isn't going to work for me afterall.
Having explicit allowed vlan lists on trunk port is a good idea in
any case. Open trunks which is the Cisco
+1
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
sth...@nethelp.no
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 12:54
To: reuben-cisco-...@reub.net
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco ME3600X and Bridge-Domain
Just want to confirm my unterstanding
(and don't have currently lab access to verify)
SETUP:
CE1 --- OSPF --- PE1
| |
OSPFMP-BGP
||
CE2 --- OSPF --- PE2
*CE2 is vrf-lite enabled*
*
*
Does CE2 just ignore the Downbit or th
Interesting question
If CE1 advertises a prefix to mpls via PE1
Than on PE2 during redistribution of mp-bgp to ospf in vrf context the down bit
is set in the header of LSA3 and external route tag on LSA5 encoded as the
mp-bgp as# by default or according to the cmd: domain-tag tag
Now ospf
Perhaps the first thing to do is to check the logs on the
TACACS server. Is the server seeing the request? If the
server is seeing the request and is denying then there should
be a reason given in the log record.
There are a number of things that could cause this kind of
problem. You might check
We use ASAs because we also want to ACL the traffic from various wlans/vlans.
We pass the L2 connections from controllers over to ASA which holds
the .1 for all of the vlans.
1. Re: ASA vs. ASR for large Wireless NAT deployment ? (Matthew Huff)
___
From the Active RP you can switch to the SPs with the attach slot#
command.
Also, a good command I use is show file systems. This way you can see all
the storage devices available.
Regards,
Antonio Soares, CCIE #18473 (RS/SP)
amsoa...@netcabo.pt
http://www.ccie18473.net
-Original
I just got a confirmation from the BU, and the restrictions were reduced
with 15.1(2)EY, as it now supports IRB for unicast.
So now the restrictions for 15.1(2)EY are:
*You must configure SVIs for bridge-domain routing.
*The bridge domain must be in the range of 1 to 4094 to match the
supported
Hi.
Anyone have any good sugestions for what cisco router to use in a
smaller branch office.
It will forward about 50megabit/s of traffic. Also i will set up two
GRE over ipsec tunnels from this router to a bigger cisco box in the
datacenter and will run OSPF over the gre tunnels to have
sounds realistic to me (using 2821). Make sure you have the right feature
set. I'm using AdvIPservice IOS for the same + voice fw.
Scott
2011/11/14 Kristoffer Björk kristoffer.bj...@gmail.com
Hi.
Anyone have any good sugestions for what cisco router to use in a
smaller branch office.
Question of the day...
Why turn on netflow in a 6k w/ SUP720-10G if netflow in 6k (minus the SUP2T) is
notoriously not good? As Adam Powers from Lancope, I find myself continually
tuning netflow aging due to TCAM exceeded log messages
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 11:15 -0600, Mark Mason wrote:
Question of the day...
Why turn on netflow in a 6k w/ SUP720-10G if netflow in 6k (minus the
SUP2T) is notoriously not good?
Because it's better than nothing? :-)
--
Peter
___
cisco-nsp mailing
Netflow on the Sup720 (EARL7) is only bad if you exceed a certain threshold.
Netflow with TCP is of course missing flags so it is lacking some functionality.
But it is useful below a certain threshold.
Mack
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
On 11/14/2011 1:01 PM, Peter Rathlev wrote:
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 11:15 -0600, Mark Mason wrote:
Question of the day...
Why turn on netflow in a 6k w/ SUP720-10G if netflow in 6k (minus the
SUP2T) is notoriously not good?
Because it's better than nothing? :-)
Ever use a GPS that takes you to
On 14/11/2011 22:39, Tony Varriale wrote:
Ever use a GPS that takes you to the wrong place? :)
pfc3 netflow is fine if you need to measure traffic ratios or protocol
spread. Its, uh, built-in sampling mechanism means that although it's
unsuitable for some purposes, it's completely fine for
On 11/14/2011 4:57 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
e a GPS that takes you to the wrong place?:)
pfc3 netflow is fine if you need to measure traffic ratios or protocol
spread. Its, uh, built-in sampling mechanism means that although it's
unsuitable for some purposes, it's completely fine for others.
On Nov 15, 2011, at 5:57 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
pfc3 netflow is fine if you need to measure traffic ratios or protocol
spread.
Actually, in any kind of diverse source/dest/layer-4 environment, it isn't, due
to non-deterministic statistical skewing due to mls table overflow.
On Tue, 2011-11-15 at 03:25 +, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
On Nov 15, 2011, at 5:57 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
pfc3 netflow is fine if you need to measure traffic ratios or
protocol spread.
Actually, in any kind of diverse source/dest/layer-4 environment, it
isn't, due to non-deterministic
24 matches
Mail list logo
