Re: [c-nsp] C3850 and NAT

2017-02-08 Thread james list
Hi Nick What about support of pim sparse, bgp and bfd as well on nexus 12 k$? Cheers · Il 08 Feb 2017 22:50, "Nick Cutting" ha scritto: I am 99 percent sure it is not supported, or if it is will be sent to the CPU. Look at nexus 3k or 9k for a $12000 line rate NAT switch. -Original Mess

Re: [c-nsp] C3850 and NAT

2017-02-08 Thread Nick Cutting
I am 99 percent sure it is not supported, or if it is will be sent to the CPU. Look at nexus 3k or 9k for a $12000 line rate NAT switch. -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of james list Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2017 4:17 PM To: cis

[c-nsp] C3850 and NAT

2017-02-08 Thread james list
Dear experts, I'm wondering if anybody can give detailed or experienced info about NAT support on c3850. I m not able to find any info on feature set but on the web is not so clear... I'm looking a cheapest, in respect to 6500 or 68xx, switch able to support NAT (not a router). Thank you in advan

[c-nsp] Cisco Security Advisory: Cisco ASA Clientless SSL VPN CIFS Heap Overflow Vulnerability

2017-02-08 Thread Cisco Systems Product Security Incident Response Team
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Cisco Security Advisory: Cisco ASA Clientless SSL VPN CIFS Heap Overflow Vulnerability Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20170208-asa Revision 1.0 For Public Release 2017 February 8 16:00 GMT (UTC

[c-nsp] Cisco Security Advisory: Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Windows SBL Privileges Escalation Vulnerability

2017-02-08 Thread Cisco Systems Product Security Incident Response Team
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Cisco Security Advisory: Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Windows SBL Privileges Escalation Vulnerability Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20170208-anyconnect Revision 1.0 For Public Release 2017 February 8 16:00 GMT (UTC

Re: [c-nsp] IOS XR 5.3.4 tx-only or bi-dir monitor session = IPv6 DoS?

2017-02-08 Thread Phil Mayers
On 07/02/17 19:21, Jason Lixfeld wrote: Unless I’m doing something dumb, I’ve got an odd one here. A new ASR9000 5.3.4 box in the lab with one interface enabled for upstream traffic (BFD, LDP, ISIS) and one bundle interface enabled for downstream traffic (dot1q routed subinterfaces with one a