Hello Friends,
At IPv4 prefixes , we advertised with /24 ( maximum prefix length )
At IPv6 prefixes , it will be /48 ?
I would like to confirm it
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
You can start with /32
BR,
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:50:42 +0300
From: hilmy...@gmail.com
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] IPv6 prefixes
Hello Friends,
At IPv4 prefixes , we advertised with /24 ( maximum prefix length )
At IPv6 prefixes , it will be /48 ?
I would like to
On 6/18/13 10:50 AM, Ahmed Hilmy wrote:
Hello Friends,
At IPv4 prefixes , we advertised with /24 ( maximum prefix length )
At IPv6 prefixes , it will be /48 ?
I would like to confirm it
The more you can aggreate, the better it is for everybody.
While it's okay (so far) to announce separate
On (2013-06-18 12:00 +0300), Mohammad Khalil wrote:
You can start with /32
You need /48 for PI addresses.
--
++ytti
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:50:42AM +0300, Ahmed Hilmy wrote:
At IPv4 prefixes , we advertised with /24 ( maximum prefix length )
At IPv6 prefixes , it will be /48 ?
I would like to confirm it
Cisco routers can announce anything up to a /128.
Everyhing else is not a question for
Hi,
I made a port channel between two switches:
http://s23.postimg.org/yx3a6h1i3/port_channel_between_switches.png
As you can see, one of those is a WS-C4506. It has a SUP V-10GE. I
looped 10GigE ports on SUP which caused heavy CPU load:
99
99
100
Hi,
now got another annoying card, this one does not boot from bootdisk:
--
System Bootstrap, Version 8.5(4)
Copyright (c) 1994-2009 by cisco Systems, Inc.
Cat6k-Sup720/SP processor with 1048576 Kbytes of main memory
Autoboot executing command: boot
Dear all
During the last weeks I have learned quite a lot about the QoS
mechanisms available on the Cat6500 platform.
Now I would like to confirm somehow whether I understand one thing
correctly:
As soon as I have a connection with less bandwidth than the interface
line rate connected to the
On Tue, 18 Jun 2013, Grischa Stegemann wrote:
Thus there is no way to achieve something like a shaping down to 5MBit/s
AND considering the dscp/cos-classes at the same time.
You should look into wrr-queue shape, but it's not on the cards you
mentioned.
On 18.06.13 14:17, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
You should look into wrr-queue shape, but it's not on the cards you
mentioned.
Yes of course, I forgot to mention this one. But as it is not available
on any 10/100/1000-TX-linecard it is no solution in this case.
Grischa
10 matches
Mail list logo