On 30/04/14 14:19, Mark Mason wrote:
Looking at some potential edge redesign options when comparing
6880-X-XL [larger route table @ 2M IPv4] ASR1004/1006 platforms.
Thinking about leaving the edge routers to ASR's (could be more than
4 carriers - 1 per ASR) and then route-reflecting down to the
Hi,
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 06:43:32AM +0200, Garry wrote:
We have a 3750X stack (2 switches) doing pure L2 at a small POP (Acting as
a core switch) - The small buffers are causing a lot of performance
issues, so we are looking to upgrade them.
Not sure about your feature requirements,
On 30/04/14 14:19, Mark Mason wrote:
Looking at some potential edge redesign options when comparing
6880-X-XL [larger route table @ 2M IPv4] ASR1004/1006 platforms.
Thinking about leaving the edge routers to ASR's (could be more than
4 carriers - 1 per ASR) and then route-reflecting down to
Maybee the new 3650 is enough?
Should have dubbel the buffer size according to cisco (12mb vs 6mb) Shared on
all ports.
Question is if its enough?
Bästa hälsningar / Best regards,
Gustav Uhlander
Senior Communication Infrastructure Engineer
Steria AB
Kungsbron 13
Box 169
SE-101 23
On 02/05/2014 10:28, Vitkovský Adam wrote:
Unless you need some XE specific features you can do it solely with a pair
6880s.
(Vanilla IOS 15.3 supports
Note 6880 doesn't run 15.3 or even being generous a vanilla train ;o)
No idea if those specific features are on 15.1SY
Seeing as how the ME3600 has no useful remote span capabilities, I just tried
to do a ghetto pseudowire span:
1. Connect a trunk port from some STP, PVST+ and CDP spewing test switch to
gi0/1 on local ME3600
2. Monitor source gi0/1 on local ME3600
3. Monitor destination gi0/2 on local ME3600
4.
Hi Jason,
And what about the xconnect from the g0/1 on local me3600 to g0/4 on remote
me3600, wouldn't that work?
On the g0/1 on local me3600 create service instance with encapsulation
default and do the xconnect under the service instance.
adam
I've done something similar in the past without any issues. It's not really
convenient to do at scale though. Assuming you only want small situational
dumps for troubleshooting and not a permanent copy of your traffic , embedded
packet capture might serve you better.
My thoughts and words are
I agree, but like any sort of remote SPAN, EPC is also not available on this
platform, sadly and surprisingly.
Sent from my iPhone
On May 2, 2014, at 9:27 AM, Spyros Kakaroukas skakarou...@rolaware.com
wrote:
I've done something similar in the past without any issues. It's not really
That shouldn't be true, unless something changed in the very latest software
release. I've successfully used EPC on me3600x boxes quite a few times in the
past.
My thoughts and words are my own.
Kind Regards,
Spyros
-Original Message-
From: Jason Lixfeld [mailto:ja...@lixfeld.ca]
For me it's hit or miss. For example, I can't catch anything in the buffer
when setting my capture point to be a physical interface on the device. This
is where it would be most useful for me. Also, if I do a tcp capture of every
packet on the device, the capture buffer fills up at a *much*
Why you say Cisco doesn't see any longevity for 4500X?
4500X is here to stay, as part of 4500 family, which itself is also here to
stay. Roadmap points far into future.
You can go ahead with 4500X deployments, or experiment with other metro
platforms - ME3600/3800 or even 6880.
--
./
On 2
Anyone know why this bvi stays up up even though there aren't any L2
interfaces/pw's up in this bridge-domain?
I would like the BVI interface to go down down when there are no underlying
layer 2 connections to be serviced.
This was the way ios switches have always operated. not sure why
Dear All,
Has anyone used to meet the problem of packet lost on interface loopback
for IPv4 and IPv6 is has no problem in Cisco CISCO7606-S. CPU process is
normal 5% to 10%. but we have found the logging
%MLSCEF-SP-4-FIB_EXCEPTION_THRESHOLD: Hardware CEF entry usage is at 95%
capacity for MPLS
14 matches
Mail list logo
