Re: [c-nsp] cat 6800 performance mode

http://www.businessinsider.com/cisco-buys-insieme-for-863-million-2013-11?IR=T Aled On 31 December 2015 at 16:19, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 04:17:07PM +, Justin Ream wrote: >> As far as internal Cisco politics go: I've heard the situation has

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Router 2821 is having issue getting error

On 24 April 2015 at 08:48, Lukas Tribus luky...@hotmail.com wrote: There was an issue a while back that Cisco had with faulty memory from a particular vendor. Thats about RAM, not CF cards. There was a 64GB CF Card recall which affected 2800 routers (a long while ago, 2006)

Re: [c-nsp] power requirement for WS-X614E-GE-45AT in reverse POE mode

I think it could work if you could use ZR optics on the far end and use the excess received power to drive the 6704-10GE line card directly. Aled On 1 April 2015 at 08:38, Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de wrote: Hi, quick question, because I cannot find the answer on cisco.com. If I run a

Re: [c-nsp] ipv6 router ospf vs router ospfv3

On 25 March 2014 15:51, Phil Mayers p.may...@imperial.ac.uk wrote: Almost certainly. Note that some commands e.g. network point-to-point are not available on some platforms in the ipv6 format, only the ospfv3 one. Cisco's OSPFv3 seems to have been through at least three different syntax

Re: [c-nsp] 7200VXR to ASR upgrade

On 19 February 2014 03:21, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote: On Wednesday, February 19, 2014 01:28:59 AM Jeremy Bresley wrote: The only caveats I'll mention on the ASR1K is that they are priced around 1GbE ports. There are OC3/OC12/OC48/DS3 cards available, but they tend to get

Re: [c-nsp] 7200VXR to ASR upgrade

On 19 February 2014 16:20, Adam Greene maill...@webjogger.net wrote: Assuming the customer goes with the ASR1002-X, which still seems to me to be the best forward-looking option for this particular customer's needs, in order to get an Advanced IP Services license (which I assume is the

Re: [c-nsp] Search small replacement for Cisco 12k with ATM/OC3 interface

On 20 January 2014 16:14, Rolf Hanßen n...@rhanssen.de wrote: My list now contains: CISCO7204VXR-CH PWR-7200-AC= NPE-400 (512 MB Ram) C7200-I/O-2FE/E PA-A3-OC3SMI Bear in mind this is dual Fast Ethernet not Gigabit Ethernet, compared to your current GSR. If you could find a NPE-G1 or G2

Re: [c-nsp] Search small replacement for Cisco 12k with ATM/OC3 interface

MBit, so 100MBit upstream is ok. kind regards Rolf On 20/01/2014 16:20, Aled Morris wrote: Bear in mind this is dual Fast Ethernet not Gigabit Ethernet, compared to your current GSR. Traffic levels were ~10Mbit, afair? Nick

Re: [c-nsp] ISP / MPLS POP design

On 9 November 2013 20:26, CiscoNSP List cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com wrote: I dont have access to pricing atm, but are the 3600X's a lot more expensive than 4948's? For comparison, 4948E-E (which has 48 copper ports, four 10G SFP+ ports and Enterprise software for full IP routing features)

Re: [c-nsp] SC to LC converter

Can you get your cabling contractor to cut the ends and splice on some LC tails? That would be the lowest-loss (and neatest) solution. Failing that I've used SC-SC couplers and a short SC-LC patch leads in the past. Works fine if you're not at the limit of your power budget. Aled On 14

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Switch Portfolio Miss

If you are brand-loyal to Cisco you might want to look at the Nexus 3000 or Nexus 6000 ranges. Aled On 12 September 2013 15:56, Mark Mason mma...@jackhenry.com wrote: The Cisco product line seems to be missing an equivalent of the Arista 7050 100Mb/1Gb/10GBase-T. Maybe taking the 4500x

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Switch Portfolio Miss

Garraux [mailto:oli...@g.garraux.net] *Sent:* Thursday, September 12, 2013 11:46 AM *To:* Aled Morris *Cc:* Mark Mason; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net *Subject:* Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Switch Portfolio Miss ** ** How is the Arista 7050 different than the Nexus 3064? Cisco recently slashed the pricing

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Switch Portfolio Miss

and builds for the 3k’s aren’t too bad. Great input guys! ** ** *From:* aled.w.mor...@googlemail.com [mailto:aled.w.mor...@googlemail.com] *On Behalf Of *Aled Morris *Sent:* Thursday, September 12, 2013 11:49 AM *To:* Mark Mason *Cc:* Oliver Garraux; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net *Subject

Re: [c-nsp] Nexu 5020 HSRP issues

You do have the L3 daughter card installed in both your 5k's, right? I think without the card you can configure IP but HSRP won't work. Aled On 9 August 2013 16:34, Christian Kildau li...@unixhosts.org wrote: Nope, there's no access-list, no CoPP, no nothing regarding security so far. On

Re: [c-nsp] Nexu 5020 HSRP issues

we have is: NAME: Chassis, DESCR: Nexus5020 Chassis PID: N5K-C5020P-BF , VID: V02 , SN: FLC12450322 NAME: Module 1, DESCR: 40x10GE/Supervisor PID: N5K-C5020P-BF , VID: V02 , SN: JAB1246007K On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Aled Morris al...@qix.co.uk wrote: You do have the L3

Re: [c-nsp] Nexu 5020 HSRP issues

(Altough not available with our license) But feature hsrp is available and I can configure it, so I think this should work?! On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 6:23 PM, James Ventre network...@ventrefamily.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Aled Morris al...@qix.co.uk wrote: You do have the L3

Re: [c-nsp] ME3800X/ME3600X/ME3600X-24CX/ASR903/ASR901 Deployment Simplification Feedback

On 21 July 2013 15:47, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote: I'm hoping making it a fixed (non-modular) chassis full of Gig-E (and a few 10-Gig-E) ports should make it cheaper than having a modularized chassis, and also keep other BU's within Cisco at bay. Maybe an ME version of the

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 6500 mounting with cables

On 21 July 2013 17:09, Justin M. Streiner strei...@cluebyfour.org wrote: One other thing that we've been factoring in is the cost of large numbers of copper cable runs, and the number of IDFs per floor/building. Plenum- rated shielded Cat6A is much more of a pain to manage than Cat5E (much

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 6500 mounting with cables

On 21 July 2013 19:42, Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de wrote: Hi, On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 05:17:15PM +0100, Aled Morris wrote: It's interesting that even the Cat 6500 family now has a fabric extender option for distributing switching capability into smaller/more localised wiring

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 6500 mounting with cables

On 21 July 2013 21:34, quinn snyder snyd...@gmail.com wrote: i think its just a natural evolution of where cisco is trending. yes -- some of the ia features resemble the n2k functionality -- but there are additional enhancements that make ia more of a campus tool -- rather than the d/c.

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 6500 mounting with cables

On 9 July 2013 14:35, Chris Marget ch...@marget.com wrote: It's almost hard to find Cat5 these days - what's driving the demand? Surely people aren't buying Cat6 with TIA TSB-155 in mind, so why is the market flooded with better-but-not-meaningfully-so cable? I've always put it down to FUD

Re: [c-nsp] New Catalyst 6k chassis

7700 seems to be a very different beast from the existing 7000 too. No hardware in common it seems. Aled On 26 June 2013 20:10, Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de wrote: Hi, On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 04:38:16PM +0100, Phil Mayers wrote: Can someone confirm rumors about the new Catalyst 6k

Re: [c-nsp] Replacement for Cisco ACE load balancers

On 4 February 2013 15:13, Matthew Huff mh...@ox.com wrote: We are looking at F5, Foundry (Brocade), and Citrix Netscaler. Anyone else go through this and have recommendations/horror stories/info they would like to share? Thanks. We're in the same position and have been looking at the A10

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 3850 switches

On 17 January 2013 19:05, Blake Pfankuch bl...@pfankuch.me wrote: So I'm surfing cisco.com for an environment refresh within our infrastructure and looking at access switches. I see the Stack Power Cable in Cisco Commerce workspace now says Catalyst 3750X and 3850 Stack Power Cable 30 CM

Re: [c-nsp] ASR-100x intro

On 5 January 2013 12:32, Charles Sprickman sp...@bway.net wrote: The one area where I would like to be more high touch is in traffic shaping and QoS. Often times we'll have a metro-ethernet customer who wants 50Mb/s and our metro-e provider can only provide an unthrottled 100Mb/s connection.

Re: [c-nsp] Advice for automating changs to asr 1001

On 16 January 2013 08:52, Lee ler...@gmail.com wrote: 2. Dropping the config onto a tftp server then using snmp to trigger config download and wr mem easier than clogin since you don't have to worry about special characters, but our security office sees 'clear text protocol' (ie.

Re: [c-nsp] recommendation for upgrade-paths pls

On 20 December 2012 02:54, Harald Kapper h...@kapper.net wrote: Hi, we're currently on 7206VXR with NPE-G2 and NPE-G1 on our network. [...] I'd be happy to receive recommendations whether to go the ASR-1000 route or skip this and go directoy to 760x-systems (using which RSP/SUP?). The

Re: [c-nsp] cisco switch request

On 30 November 2012 16:42, hasan alperen selçuk h.a.sel...@hotmail.comwrote: last mail sorry,i dont understand how mail became this. layer2 *4x10gb fiber port **12x1gb fiber port If you prefer IOS to NX-OS then the 4500-X will give you 16 (or more) 1/10 Gb SFP+ ports It

[c-nsp] URPF MAC check

Something I've been thinking about... I'd like to validate the source address on packets received from peers. Strict URPF is great when you have point-to-point links but it isn't quite as useful when you have a shared fabric like an Internet exchange. The problem is all sources on the same

Re: [c-nsp] URPF MAC check

On 23 November 2012 11:06, Dobbins, Roland rdobb...@arbor.net wrote: On Nov 23, 2012, at 5:49 PM, Aled Morris wrote: It would be handy if URPF could use both the L3 FIB (as it does now) and the L2 ARP table to validate source addressess I guess I don't understand what you mean

Re: [c-nsp] URPF MAC check

On 23 November 2012 15:01, Aivars aiv...@ml.lv wrote: If we are talking about IX environment, they usually protect themselves from wrong traffic. At least in EU. Traffic is only accepted on a port if it comes from a fixed MAC/IP. I would not worry much about that. If it is something else or

Re: [c-nsp] sup2t XL with non XL linecards

On 22 November 2012 08:14, Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de wrote: Hi, On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 06:23:18PM -0800, . . wrote: The linecard will just be doing l2 switching, and any l3 that needs the routes will be going to the supervisor, that's fine, just don't want the supervisor to

Re: [c-nsp] sup2t XL with non XL linecards

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps708/products_qanda_item09186a00809a7673.shtml Aled On 22 November 2012 16:22, Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com wrote: It will run in non xl mode. On Nov 22, 2012 11:26 AM, . . raincit...@cosmo.com wrote: Hi, If we have a 6500 with a Sup2T

Re: [c-nsp] sup2t XL with non XL linecards

On 22 November 2012 21:49, . . raincit...@cosmo.com wrote: This doesn't seem possible as there are no 10g line cards with a CFC that can also be used for VSL (only option seems to be the WS-X6704-10GE, but can't be used in vsl link for some reason). That's true. Cisco don't want 10G line

Re: [c-nsp] nexus 5548 versus C4900M

On 21 November 2012 07:55, Holemans Wim wim.holem...@ua.ac.be wrote: Now I have to create a new, similar service cluster. The first idea was to copy the setup but as we are also looking at Nexus for our datacenter, I noticed the Nexus 5548UP. This gives you out-of-the-box 32 1G/10G ports and

Re: [c-nsp] config smart serial port

On 31 October 2012 09:32, Hari bamsha Sapkota sapkota.hari...@gmail.comwrote: If you are talking about real scenario, you should connect it with V.35 cable...not an smart serial back-to-back cable. Hope this helps! Aren't those back-to-back cables pinned as V.35 crossover internally? Aled

Re: [c-nsp] SSH from inside a VRF in 12.2SRE

On 22 October 2012 02:19, Skeeve Stevens skeeve+cisco...@eintellego.netwrote: The /vrf switch exists in 12.2SRE for telnet, but not for SSH. Anyone know if there is a reason for this? It exists in 12.4 I think. Out of curiosity, does it support ip ssh source-interface x y/z? That will

Re: [c-nsp] 10G Routing/Forwarding

On 5 October 2012 09:01, Garry g...@gmx.de wrote: Are there any other device in that price range that could be used for this? 1-2 10GE ports and L3 capable of course ... dynamic routes aren't really necessary, neither are ACL etc ... I'd recommend the 4948E which has four 10G SFP+ ports for

Re: [c-nsp] IPv6 Unique Local Address Routing Issue

On 10 September 2012 21:56, Mack McBride mack.mcbr...@viawest.com wrote: If you are using ULA please be sure to use the correct procedure to generate a /48 and register the /48 subnet with SixXS. This keeps ULA unique. Am I the only one to find this a bit of a contradiction in terms? If

Re: [c-nsp] acl on bvi in ios xr (9k) 4.1.2

On 20 July 2012 12:08, Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de wrote: Sometimes BVI are the poor man's multi-chassis etherchannel to get redundant links to downstream switches... Yes indeed. It is equally frustrating that neither HSRP nor VRRP are supported on ASR1k/IOS-XE BDI interfaces. Aled

Re: [c-nsp] VS-S720-10G (6509 VSS Engine) 10G Port Issue

On 12 June 2012 15:28, Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com wrote: So now we are wondering if we use the 10G port for normal Layer2 or Layer3 traffic, will it impact our engine performance or CPU utilization? Is there any detail document talking about this? If ok, then by default, each engine will

Re: [c-nsp] WS-X6708-10G-3C and 3CXL and SUP720-3BXL

On 12 June 2012 21:55, Lee Starnes lee.t.star...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I was reading on the Cisco site that the WS-X6708-10G-3C and 3CXL are compatible with the SUP720-3BXL and will operate normally. I was wondering if anyone has done this and what the performance is like. I would hate to

Re: [c-nsp] NTP on a 3750 2970

On 11 June 2012 18:00, Peter Rathlev pe...@rathlev.dk wrote: You need ntp master command to enable others to sync with this switch. Any IOS device that is in NTP sync will act as an NTP server. You only need to set ntp master if the switch has a free-running clock i.e. not synchronized to an

Re: [c-nsp] DHCP NAT router limitations

On 30 May 2012 11:17, Rens r...@autempspourmoi.be wrote: For a one day wifi event I'm looking which kind of router can be used to deliver DHCP NAT for 1000-2000 simultaneous users Total WAN capacity will be +- 50Mbps Would a 1841 or a 2811 be able to handle all this NAT/DHCP? Neither of

Re: [c-nsp] Juniper equivalent for Cisco Cat 6500

On 23 May 2012 08:35, Andrew Miehs and...@2sheds.de wrote: Hi all, Does Juniper have a box equivalent to the Cat 6500s for 10G Ethernet MPLS PE layer. I am looking for alternatives to the 6504s for collapsed PE/CEs for a 10G campus Ethernet network. Unfortunately the Cat 4500s don't do

Re: [c-nsp] Will the Cisco 2911 push GigE with NAT enabled ?

On 30 April 2012 16:40, Dave dcostell-cisco...@torzo.com wrote: Thank you all for the responses. I actually found the PDF shortly after sending the e-mail. Sorry for wasting everyone's time. (Also a part of me was hoping the PDF was wrong). So for an office router that will do GigE + VPN +

[c-nsp] IP-FORWARD-MIB from RFC 2096 on ASA etc.

From what I've been able to determine Cisco has no plans to expose the routing table via SNMP from the ASA platform. Does anyone in the community have a bug or feature request open with TAC for this? Maybe a bit of customer demand would help persuade them. Aled

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9000v and distance

The ASR9000v satellite doesn't sound like much of an improvement over simply trunking to a conventional L2 switch and having each switchport presented as a separate VLAN to the router for L3 processing. The ability to manage it all with one instance of IOS might be simpler but using discrete L2

Re: [c-nsp] New Cisco ME3400 IOS?

On 23 March 2012 07:59, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou ach...@forthnetgroup.grwrote: Can you please provide more details about Enhanced QoS buffer management? Sometimes this is marketing speak for now works (more) like the documentation claims it always did i.e. fixed wiithout admitting that the code

Re: [c-nsp] cisco as LNS

On 18 February 2012 16:25, Ann Kwok annkwo...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Which cisco product can be LNS to support 2000 ppp users and around 850M output? ls it stable? How much memory recommend too? ASR1001 is the recommended platform now. I've not used one for LNS but ours have been

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 881G PPPoE Issue

On 11 January 2012 19:55, Clayton Zekelman clay...@mnsi.net wrote: Cisco IOS Software, C880 Software (C880DATA-UNIVERSALK9-M),**Version 15.1(1)T3, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) flash:c880data-universalk9-**mz.151-1.T3.bin I believe IOS 15 on the 881 requires feature licensing. Which licenses do

Re: [c-nsp] Vlans on an ASR9000

On 5 January 2012 13:54, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote: On 05/01/2012 11:41, sth...@nethelp.no wrote: For some of us it's just as important that the SFP-* modules generally support DOM / DDM while the GLC-* modules don't. it beggars belief that vendors are still shipping non

Re: [c-nsp] Recommendation for small GBit router

On 16 December 2011 10:53, Phil Mayers p.may...@imperial.ac.uk wrote: On 12/16/2011 01:09 AM, Rolf Hanßen wrote: Hi Andrew, just pure forwarding of a few public networks towards each other and internet with default route. No tunnels, no NAT, no DHCP, no VPN or something similar.

Re: [c-nsp] Recommendation for small GBit router

On 16 December 2011 11:58, Andrew Miehs and...@2sheds.de wrote: HI Aled, On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aled Morris al...@qix.co.uk wrote: ASR1001 MSRP $17k + $5k for IP BASE licence I think the IP BASE license is included with the ASR1001 for US$17K list. Sadly not, you have to pay

Re: [c-nsp] Limit Access right on Cisco 6500 IOS ?

On 28 August 2011 06:32, Olivier CALVANO o.calv...@gmail.com wrote: I want know if i can limit a user to : - See port states on of module card (not all) - See vlan database and can create/modofy/delete a vlan - Can configure a lot of Port on a specifique card Although TACACS+

Re: [c-nsp] Old catalyst 6k 10/100 RJ45 cards.

On 14 April 2011 19:53, Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de wrote: Hi, On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 08:59:47AM -0400, Lamar Owen wrote: Oddly enough, 6348's on eBay go for less than 6148's (the non-GE TX variety, There's a 6148 and a 6148A - the A has much larger buffers... and jumbo frame

Re: [c-nsp] Serial lead

On 29 March 2011 12:26, Gary Smith li...@l33t-d00d.co.uk wrote: using a PL2303 based converter. Down side is that you can't send break commands with it (limitation of the chipset, apparently). Cost me less than a tenner, though. me too but when connected to a FreeBSD laptop it does send

Re: [c-nsp] q on Cisco 3745 pricing

On 1 December 2010 23:20, Patrick Giagnocavo patr...@zill.net wrote: Just a quick question: Why are the 3745's so inexpensive? I am seeing them go for about $175 base price (128MB RAM/ 64MB flash, 1 power supply) on that auction site and other places. Is there a feature that Cisco is not

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 4900M BGP Support

On 27 September 2010 23:03, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote: On 27/09/2010 23:55, Jimmy Changa wrote: Thanks for the info. I'm looking for a Cisco solution that takes up the least amount of rack space and can handle full table. Any suggestions? C2821 with 512k RAM. Takes 1U vertical

Re: [c-nsp] Recommendation request for gateway router specs

I'd look at the ISR2 series if you want a good price/performance balance. According to Cisco the 3925E (that's the one with the newer SPE-200) can easily push a couple of hundred megabits and comes with four gig Ethernet ports as standard and 1 GB of memory (which you can upgrade to 2 GB) Aled

Re: [c-nsp] Anyone else seeing downloads not working

On 26 July 2010 18:31, Jason Gurtz jasongu...@npumail.com wrote: Non-java option gives a 404 or connection reset. Java download mis-manager just says error after each item. Am I the only one seeing this? I see this often (every couple of months) and have to clear my cookies for cisco.com