As far as I hear from my CSE, tornado cards will work with older RSPs, but will
have performance limitations due low speed fabric connections. Unable to check
on my boxes - already upgraded
--
Dmitry Kiselev
From: phil...@gmail.com
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 21:05:28 -0700
To:
Hi Scott
My 2 cents.
I guess you could advertise two /44s through eBGP sessions (one per each
site). In case one uplink goes down, you would advertise locally generated
/44 and /44 route learned through iBGP from another site. Basically,
router may advertise /44 from the neighboring site as soon
I wrote:
We bought a licence pack allowing 100 additinal APs to join Now,
the licence refuses to install
It turned out to be a wrong type of licence. Finally TAC believed that
and issued a new one. The next step is to find out how to avoid this
issue when bying the next set of licences.
--
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 11:42:18AM +0300, Matti Saarinen wrote:
It turned out to be a wrong type of licence. Finally TAC believed that
and issued a new one. The next step is to find out how to avoid this
issue when bying the next set of licences.
Not buy from vendors that force that sort
Hi
I've been having intermittent problems logging into CCO in the last few
weeks - and the troubleshooting I've done so far seems to indicate the
problem only occurs when I'm connecting to it over IPv6. It seems the
actual authentication to www.cisco.com is handled by a site with
hostname
Typhoon are the newer cards. They probably work but never tried since
its kind of a waste.
--
From: Dmitry Kiselev dmi...@dmitry.net
Sent: 9/20/2013 3:45
To: Phil Bedard phil...@gmail.com; Jason Lixfeld ja...@lixfeld.ca;
cisco-nsp
NSP cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
-35655025
g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 305 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20130920/f875fe4a
On 20/09/13 11:34, Reuben Farrelly wrote:
Hi
I've been having intermittent problems logging into CCO in the last few
weeks - and the troubleshooting I've done so far seems to indicate the
problem only occurs when I'm connecting to it over IPv6. It seems the
actual authentication to
Guys, could you send me more specifics unicast ?
(Highly desirably with some PCAPs off your client segment that would
capture the entirety of the session with the problem).
I'll take a look, once we root-cause it I'll follow-up with our IT folks
and get back.
--a
On Fri, 20 Sep 2013,
Hi,
Based on experience, can anybody recommend a Nagios plugin to monitor
interface state, bandwidth utilisation and error reporting for nexus
devices? I've stumbled across a couple of examples, but I would definitely
appreciate community input.
Thanks in advance!
On Thu, 19 Sep 2013, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
I'm wondering if anyone knows off the top of their head what the limitations
are in terms of 40/100G LC support with RSP4.
1xRSP-4G - 93-95 Gbps/slot FDX
2xRSP-4G - 186-190 Gbps/slot FDX
I seem to remember reading something at some point
On Thu, 19 Sep 2013, Phil Bedard wrote:
The 9010 with the non-RSP440 is about 184G/slot using both fabrics.. I
am not entirely sure the 100G cards work without the 440...
It does, however in single RSP-4G you are limited 93-95Gbps. No problem
with redundant RSP-4G.
Regards,
On 20.09.2013 10:42, Matti Saarinen wrote:
I wrote:
We bought a licence pack allowing 100 additinal APs to join Now,
the licence refuses to install
It turned out to be a wrong type of licence. Finally TAC believed that
and issued a new one. The next step is to find out how to avoid this
Hi,
I have three WS-C2960G-24TC-L switches which all have about ten
servers connected. Each switch has a single 1GigE uplink. Those 1GigE
uplink ports on all switches experience occasional OutDiscards. I
would like to increase the outgoing buffer on uplink ports in order to
mitigate the egress
On 20/09/2013 17:56, Martin T wrote:
Hi,
I have three WS-C2960G-24TC-L switches which all have about ten
servers connected. Each switch has a single 1GigE uplink. Those 1GigE
uplink ports on all switches experience occasional OutDiscards.
As per Gert's reply - this is a platform feature. Even
Thanks for the feedback. Just found the bug a few minutes ago:
http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fet
chBugDetails
http://tools.cisco.com/Support/BugToolKit/search/getBugDetails.do?method=fe
tchBugDetailsbugId=CSCuh25271 bugId=CSCuh25271
In my case I
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 07:56:26PM +0300, Martin T wrote:
I have three WS-C2960G-24TC-L switches which all have about ten
[..]
Any suggestions other than reduce the traffic on switch uplink ports?
Get some real switches...
Not exactly constructive, sorry. Been there, felt the pain,
Basically, you're using the wrong switch if you say the word server. That
being said, you can search the archives for the proper configuration to
oversubscribe the shared buffers.
-Blake
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at
Hello,
We just started using the ME3400's (ME-3400G-12CS-A, 12.2(58)SE2,
ME340x-METROIPACCESSK9-M ) in our network and are noticing a fairly high CPU
load compared what we were used to on the older 3550's.
The config is pretty much the same on the new M#3400's then what we had on the
3550's.
Hello guys,
I was preparing a few 5585-X upgrades to 8.4.6.5 and I got this:
+
FW# copy ftp: disk0:
Address or name of remote host [x.x.x.x]?
Source filename [asa846-5-smp-k8.bin]?
Destination filename
You have to got 9.1.2 first, then upgrade to 9.1.3
I just hit this today too.
--Karl
Karl Putland
Senior Engineer
*SimpleSignal*
Anywhere: 303-242-8608
http://www.simplesignal.com/explainer_video.php
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Antonio Soares amsoa...@netcabo.ptwrote:
Hello guys,
On Fri, 20 Sep 2013, Antonio Soares wrote:
I was preparing a few 5585-X upgrades to 8.4.6.5 and I got this:
...
Destination filename [asa846-5-smp-k8.bin]?
...
No Cfg structure found in downloaded image file
Perhaps your ASA image is corrupted? Did you compare the MD5 signature of
the file
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 07:23:17PM +0100, Phil Mayers wrote:
(However: I wonder if the various techniques being discussed elsewhere -
like the new Linux kernel packet pacing, disabling TCP segmentation
offload and reducing nic ring, kernel and app buffers - might alleviate
the
At 08:43 AM 9/17/2013 Tuesday, Yuri Bank noted:
Hi Tim,
Thanks for your response.
I should have phrased my question differently. I'm not suggesting
that FP IS-IS actually interacts with PIM-SM directly.
My question is: Will the FP device, which is running PIM-SM on some
SVI, send PIM
the basic concept of 3069 is to allow you to assign ip addresses one at
a time to systems in a data center, but still keep them in separate
broadcast domains and avoid ip stealing. i have been doing this for
quite some time (before i had ever seen the rfc) by using 1 vlan per
customer and a
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 07:23:17PM +0100, Phil Mayers wrote:
(However: I wonder if the various techniques being discussed
elsewhere - like the new Linux kernel packet pacing, disabling TCP
segmentation offload and reducing nic ring, kernel and app buffers -
might alleviate the generation of
Making the linux box slower in the ways described (other than packet
pacing) would just increase the cpu load. If those are feeder servers,
you're much better off dropping the link speed to 100m or configuring TC
outbound than turning off a lot of the cpu offloading.
Or alternately, not trying to
Having some problems with TAC troubleshooting this one.
Wondering if anyone has run into this before
It's a 7606 with an RSP720-3cxl and ES+20g card terminating double tagged
traffic as well as pppoe users. double tagged traffic is terminated using
'access' subinterfaces referencing a
28 matches
Mail list logo
