Hi John,
Should be the following:
conf t
router pim
address-family ipv4
register-source Loopback0
Or the obligatory oneliner:
router pim address-family ipv4 register-source loopback 0
Regards,
Steinar
On 20/08/14 22:04, John Neiberger jneiber...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a use case
Dear List
I would love to hear some feed back on the 5.1.2 Train of IOS XR.
This was preloaded in a few boxes (9010) and I am looking for the most
stable train without downgrading (fingers crossed).
Will be running:
MP-BGP
VRF
OSPF
--
*Med Vänliga Hälsningar / Best Regards*
*Mattias
On 13 June 2014 09:39, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
I had off-list contact, it seems to be CSCup00831.
Cheers,
James.
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
James Bensley
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 4:39
On 21/08/2014 10:43, Mattias Gyllenvarg wrote:
I would love to hear some feed back on the 5.1.2 Train of IOS XR.
This was preloaded in a few boxes (9010) and I am looking for the most
stable train without downgrading (fingers crossed).
Hi Mattias,
I've had no problems so far on a relatively
Wait for 5.1.3 it will be out soon. We have had a number of minor issues in
5.1.2 including the vtys not working.
Jared Mauch
On Aug 21, 2014, at 5:43 AM, Mattias Gyllenvarg matt...@gyllenvarg.se wrote:
Dear List
I would love to hear some feed back on the 5.1.2 Train of IOS XR.
This
15.3(3)3S or 15.3(3)S2? If former, try the latter or above.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 21, 2014, at 5:52 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13 June 2014 09:39, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
I had off-list contact, it seems to be CSCup00831.
Cheers,
Yikes, that was dumb. Let me try that again.
If you are running 15.3(3)S, try 15.3(3)S2 or above. S2 is Cisco's recommended
point release. S3 is not.
Also, for all the hype about 15.4, I'd stay on 15.3. With all the problems
with this code since ME3x00 FCS, I think that you're asking for
We are currently running 4.3.4 and are looking at upgrading to the 5.x.x train.
FWIW, our local SE recommended against 5.1.2 and waiting for 5.1.3
mainly because of the bug fixes and how they relate to what we do here.
Supposedly 5.1.3 is due out in the next couple of weeks if you're not in a
There are many reasons to wait until 5.1.3 if you are on 4.3.4.
5.1.3 has numerous fixes we have been working with cisco to fix, including
some really basic ones like:
CSCuo25887
CSCuo93835
CSCuo70584 (vty crashes)
CSCum12533
Either way, 5.1.3 is coming out very soon, you should wait
We have personally found that 15.3(3)S2 is very stable and fixes several
bugs (not listed in the release notes) related to MPLS over SVI that are
persistent in 15.3(3)S.
-evt
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 8:55 AM, Jason Lixfeld ja...@lixfeld.ca wrote:
Yikes, that was dumb. Let me try that again.
On 21/08/2014 15:15, Aleksandr Gurbo wrote:
Nick, do you have problems on 5.1.1 with telnet access to ip address
which is on Loopback interface in vpnv4 table?
nope, I use a mgmt vrf on the Mgmt interfaces for ssh access and apparently
dodged that bullet. Also, no TE in place, so no problems
Thanks for all your input!
Machines came with 5.1.2.
As I am not in production with these machines I can, if it is better,
turbo boot to 4.3.4.
Is this the wisest path?
//Mattias
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Aleksandr Gurbo gu...@golas.ru wrote:
Hello list,
I had negative experience
Wait a week or two and load 5.1.3 when it comes out.
- Jared
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 04:24:19PM +0200, Mattias Gyllenvarg wrote:
Thanks for all your input!
Machines came with 5.1.2.
As I am not in production with these machines I can, if it is better,
turbo boot to 4.3.4.
Thanks! For whatever reason, I couldn't find it in the 5.x PIM command
references.
John
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:32 AM, Rimestad, Steinar
steinar.rimes...@altibox.no wrote:
Hi John,
Should be the following:
conf t
router pim
address-family ipv4
register-source Loopback0
Or the
Hi folks,
If you plan to implement network-wide IOS update I'd recommend to wait for
15.3(3)S4 and hope for the best.
I've got two major bugs fixed on the engineering release based on 15.3(3)S3 and
one still pending to get fixed.
adam
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp
Dear all,
we are seeing frequent crashes and subsequent reloads of snmpd on IOS
XR 4.3.4 on ASR9k.
I am not sure how much TAC cares as this is not service impacting (ha. ha.).
Is anyone else seeing those issues?
Thanks,
Richard
___
cisco-nsp
Hello list,
I had negative experience with 5.1.2 especially in cluster configuration.
Release 5.1.1 is awful. I had so many bugs on it. Nick, do you have problems on
5.1.1 with telnet access to ip address which is on Loopback interface in vpnv4
table?
Also I had problems with MPLS, where
Hi Richard,
On 21/08/14 17:19, Richard Hartmann wrote:
we are seeing frequent crashes and subsequent reloads of snmpd on IOS
XR 4.3.4 on ASR9k.
I am not sure how much TAC cares as this is not service impacting (ha. ha.).
Is anyone else seeing those issues?
We had the same issue and it's
Hi folks, Jared, Nick,
I'm wondering what influenced your decision to go/risk it with 5.1.x rather
than 4.3.4 ?
Was it any must have feature, hardware support requirement or bug fixes or a
bit of all please?
I'm asking as personally I'm really afraid of the 5.x.x train and thus decided
to go
On 21/08/2014 16:48, Vitkovský Adam wrote:
I'm wondering what influenced your decision to go/risk it with 5.1.x rather
than 4.3.4 ?
the boxes were shipped with it. There were a bunch of PWHE enhancements
that looked interesting at the time although we didn't end up using them in
the end.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 03:48:06PM +, Vitkovský Adam wrote:
Hi folks, Jared, Nick,
I'm wondering what influenced your decision to go/risk it with 5.1.x rather
than 4.3.4 ?
Was it any must have feature, hardware support requirement or bug fixes or a
bit of all please?
I'm asking as
21 matches
Mail list logo
