Well, 19xx with a proper licensing will work. Everything else depends
on pps and scale.
Aivars
I would recommend looking at the lower end ASR1Ks for that... Maybe ASR1001...
Arie
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net]
No it won't. The OP wants a device which can handle 1G of throughput.
A 1941 has the required MPLS, MTU and crypto functionality with a DATA
and SECURITY license (and are quite adequate as a low end MPLS device of
say, sub 100M) but it won't handle anywhere /remotely/ near 1G of
throughput -
Thanks for your reply Hitesh.
On 8 August 2012 04:49, Hitesh Vinzoda vinzoda.hit...@gmail.com wrote:
Try using Radreply as Cisco-Avpair += multilink:max-links=2 instead
of =
RADIUS is all served from a database and is configured correctly. I've
checked on the LNS, and all the attributes
Hi Wayne,
On 8 August 2012 10:23, Wayne Lee linkconn...@googlemail.com wrote:
Let's see the virtual-template. Our's has ppp multilink set in it.
Here it is, and ppp multilink is set:
multilink virtual-template 1
interface Virtual-Template1
ip unnumbered Loopback1
ip verify unicast
Alright, sorry. Missed the part about 1G. In that case I agree, that
the smallest ASR1k will be needed.
Aivars
No it won't. The OP wants a device which can handle 1G of throughput.
A 1941 has the required MPLS, MTU and crypto functionality with a DATA
and SECURITY license (and are quite
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 10:16:56AM +0300, Aivars wrote:
Well, 19xx with a proper licensing will work. Everything else depends
on pps and scale.
I want to see that. MPLS over GRE over *IPSEC* with 1 Gbit/sec using
a 19xx (the original poster explicitely mentioned 1 Gbit/sec as
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 01:50:21PM +0300, Aivars wrote:
Alright, sorry. Missed the part about 1G. In that case I agree, that
the smallest ASR1k will be needed.
Can the ASR1k *do* this, as in it is implemented, officially supported,
and documented to work?
gert
--
USENET is *not* the
After opening a SR for the issue below, Cisco TAC called to tell us
that SRE defaults to ingress replication without giving us any solid
reason for it. Also the TAC engineer clearly stated that we will see
no big difference between ingress and egress replication mode. He also
advised that if we
Sent from a mobile device
On 08/08/2012, at 21:11, Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 01:50:21PM +0300, Aivars wrote:
Alright, sorry. Missed the part about 1G. In that case I agree, that
the smallest ASR1k will be needed.
Can the ASR1k *do* this, as in
anybody know why me3600 svi doesn't seem to show in and out bit counts that
the underlying phy int shows? all svi's (10,11,13) are in a vrf running
over mpls l3vpn
3600#sh int vl 10 | in 30 sec
30 second input rate 2000 bits/sec, 3 packets/sec
30 second output rate 1000 bits/sec, 3
Oooh yes you're right I totally forgot about that, right the standby ASR9K
has to keep the port on dual homed device in check
Though that can be done either via LACP priority change or via Brute-force
-meaning the standby ASR9K will shut-down the standby port -I'll try the
second mode of operation
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Emanuel Popa emanuel.p...@gmail.com wrote:
After opening a SR for the issue below, Cisco TAC called to tell us
that SRE defaults to ingress replication without giving us any solid
reason for it. Also the TAC engineer clearly stated that we will see
no big
Hello,
I'm having a strange problem with a Cisco 6500/SUP720 running
12.2(33)SXJ3.
Currently we're testing this router in the lab. We have one OSPF
connection to the outside and iBGP enabled.
As soon as I enable the iBGP i get really strange effects:
I have 10.1.66.0/25 connected to a SVI
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:14 PM, John Neiberger jneiber...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Emanuel Popa emanuel.p...@gmail.com wrote:
After opening a SR for the issue below, Cisco TAC called to tell us
that SRE defaults to ingress replication without giving us any solid
reason
Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de writes:
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 10:16:56AM +0300, Aivars wrote:
Well, 19xx with a proper licensing will work. Everything else depends
on pps and scale.
I want to see that. MPLS over GRE over *IPSEC* with 1 Gbit/sec using
a 19xx (the original poster
Try to set the load-interval to 30s, then check again.
Thanks and regards,
Xu Hu
On 8 Aug, 2012, at 21:54, Aaron aar...@gvtc.com wrote:
anybody know why me3600 svi doesn't seem to show in and out bit counts that
the underlying phy int shows? all svi's (10,11,13) are in a vrf running
Are this routes all running in the ospf and bgp at the same time? If yes, it is
a normal behaviour.
Thanks and regards,
Xu Hu
On 8 Aug, 2012, at 22:27, Sebastian Wiesinger cisco-...@ml.karotte.org wrote:
Hello,
I'm having a strange problem with a Cisco 6500/SUP720 running
12.2(33)SXJ3.
Hi,
On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 12:29:12AM +0800, Xu Hu wrote:
Are this routes all running in the ospf and bgp at the same time? If yes, it
is a normal behaviour.
This is a *connected* network, and as such, by no means normal - and
from the output of the show commands Sebastian posted, you can
On 8/8/2012 10:29 AM, Xu Hu wrote:
If yes, it is a normal behaviour.
Hi,
Can you explain in what circumstance this would be normal? IIRC, OSPF
has an AD of 110 and iBGP 200, so even if the routes weren't known via
connected, how would they randomly compete for space in the FIB? I
don't
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Emanuel Popa emanuel.p...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:14 PM, John Neiberger jneiber...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 5:30 AM, Emanuel Popa emanuel.p...@gmail.com wrote:
After opening a SR for the issue below, Cisco TAC called to tell us
* Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com [2012-08-08 18:30]:
Are this routes all running in the ospf and bgp at the same time? If yes, it
is a normal behaviour.
Hello,
as Gert pointed out, the networks are connected (I also have another
network, which is a static route (redistributed into OSPF), which
As Gert has already pointed out, under no circumstances is the *normal
behavior*.
This is the result of either a mis-configuration or bug - hard to tell without
looking at OP's ospf/bgp config.
I am on sxi; similar setup with no issues.
./Randy
--- On Wed, 8/8/12, Tim Densmore
...also curious:
If there is a discrepancy between sh ip cef perfix and sh ip cef prefix
internal for prefixes in question.
Regards,
./Randy
--- On Wed, 8/8/12, Sebastian Wiesinger cisco-...@ml.karotte.org wrote:
From: Sebastian Wiesinger cisco-...@ml.karotte.org
Subject: Re: [c-nsp]
(proxy-) ARP on wrong Interface / vlan ?
You have random /32 more specific host-routes,
compare mac-address table and arp-cache
for the current wrong routed ip.
Or are the ip's those found as ospf router-id ?
Hope this help's,
Juergen
-Original Message-
From:
on 4900M
!
int vlan NNN
counter
!
did help
(yes i know the 4900M ist not a metro switch)
Mit freundlichen Gru?en
Kind regards
Veuillez agreer mes salutations distinguees
Met vriendelijke groet
Juergen.
Try to set the load-interval to 30s, then check again.
Xu Hu
On 8 Aug, 2012,
Well, ASR1K can do MPLSoGREoIPSec
Encryption is done in HW on a dedicated resource, so it does not impact
performance (but has its own capacity per ESP module type, which is way above
1Gbps on any of the models)
The QOS marking would be based on precedence (only 3 bits), as the original IP
26 matches
Mail list logo
