the same issue when
manually linking a VFI on a non-vPC N7k with a 6500 xconnect.
Regards,
Bernhard
Configs and CE facing and core facing line cards?
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Bernhard Schmidt be...@birkenwald.de
mailto:be...@birkenwald.de wrote:
Hoi,
I have started testing
Hoi,
I have started testing VPLS on N7k 6.2(2) with VLAN-based VFI membership
and I have some problem with IPv6 in the VLAN due to some/most multicast
frames getting dropped, which breaks neighbor discovery quite badly.
Unicast and Broadcast seem to be unaffected.
The topology/configuration is
Hi,
has anyone already tested NX-OS 6.2(2) on N7k with VRRPv3 and IPv6? I
have it running in the lab on a VPC pair and I always get exactly 15s
loss when the master changes to another host. Both logs look absolutely
okay, VRRP state is okay, the neighbors see each other
2013 Aug 28 08:39:28
Tim Durack tdur...@gmail.com wrote:
Can anyone explain: ipv6 nd prefix prefix no-onlink
Does this mean nodes using this prefix should send all traffic to the
router, even if the traffic might really be onlink? (This is an Ethernet
segment.)
Correct. Watch out that 6500 (SXJ) also drops the
John Elliot johnellio...@hotmail.com wrote:
Just wondering if anyone has used this product? (http://netflowauditor.com/)
Any comments/experiences are greatly appreciated.
I would not touch them with a stick. They have been spamming one of my
addresses for the last couple of years and keep
/guide/mp_mpls_ping.html#wp1078363
Interesting read, thanks. But unfortunately that does not change the
behaviour.
Best Regards,
Bernhard
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Bernhard Schmidt be...@birkenwald.de
mailto:be...@birkenwald.de wrote:
Hey everyone,
just a quick question, can
On 13.03.2013 12:18, Tóth András wrote:
Hey,
It could be CoPP related as well if that's dropping packets arriving to
the control-plane. If you have upgraded the N7k from an older release
(4.x or 5.1) you might not have all the latest and necessary CoPP rules
in the policy-map and class-maps
Phil Mayers p.may...@imperial.ac.uk wrote:
Hello Phil,
Also a good guess, but it's a fresh installation of 6.1(2) and I've
verified that there is indeed a CoPP entry for match protocol mpls.
The class is not dropping a lot of traffic.
I'm assuming you're aware of the way traceroute works for
Hello everyone,
I have a quite weird problem I cannot wrap my head around. I think it's
an annoying bug, but I'm not sure.
We are currently experimenting with MPLS in our network. The first use
will be L3VPN to get rid of some multi-step PBR when our clients with
RFC1918 addresses want to go to
Hey everyone,
just a quick question, can anyone confirm or deny that NX-OS 6.1(2) (or
(3)) MPLS P-Routers do not answer to normal traces with propagate-ttl
set (which is the default)?
csr1-kra# traceroute 129.187.0.9
traceroute to 129.187.0.9 (129.187.0.9), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 * * *
Bernhard Schmidt be...@birkenwald.de wrote:
vss1-2wr#sh mls cef mpls labels 875
Codes: + - Push label, - - Pop Label * - Swap Label, E - exp1
Index LocalLabel Out i/f
Label Op
8009 875 (EOS)(-)recirc
Hello,
we have several ASA 5540 running 8.4(3) (among) others for SSLVPN
termination of our students. We have a long standing issue where the ASA
does _not_ originate proper ICMP-too-big messages back to the sender
when a packet with DF-bit set addressed towards a VPN client is
received. The
Hi,
is anyone using the cbQosClassMapStats table from
CISCO-CLASS-BASED-QOS-MIB to get graphs for QoS service policies?
I have two pairs of 6500-class systems that have almost the exact same
configuration (minor differences in firmware versions and IP addresses).
These pairs are
Sup720-3BXL
Bernhard Schmidt be...@birkenwald.de wrote:
Now show vlan works fine, so if someone wants to reproduce I guess you
should ISSU from 5.2(1) to 5.2(3), then execute show vlan.
Update, according to TAC it could be related to having the default
reserved VLAN range moved with the command
Hey,
just a quick heads up, maybe someone is hitting that, too. Since
upgrading our test Nexus 7000 from 5.2(1) to 5.2(3) this morning we have
a failover due to a crashing vlan_mgr process every hour. It turns out
sh vlan (which is executed by RANCID every hour) reliably kills the
box.
2011 Dec
Bernhard Schmidt be...@birkenwald.de wrote:
just a quick heads up, maybe someone is hitting that, too. Since
upgrading our test Nexus 7000 from 5.2(1) to 5.2(3) this morning we have
a failover due to a crashing vlan_mgr process every hour. It turns out
sh vlan (which is executed by RANCID
Bernhard Schmidt be...@birkenwald.de wrote:
just a quick heads up, maybe someone is hitting that, too. Since
upgrading our test Nexus 7000 from 5.2(1) to 5.2(3) this morning we have
a failover due to a crashing vlan_mgr process every hour. It turns out
sh vlan (which is executed by RANCID
Hey,
we're currently labbing Nexus 7k as replacement for Sup720 in our campus
enviroment and have hit a weird issue. In the lab the SVI counters
looked good enough, but now we have moved it into limited production.
Three 10GE interfaces, all of them .1q trunks, two have dedicated OSPF
vlans to
Hi,
I have a few 6500 Sup720/3BXL boxes running various releases of
12.2(33)SXI and SXJ that seem to drop all IPv6 fragments in transit as
soon as CoPP is enabled. There are no CoPP drops logged. Even when I
remove all police lines from the policy-map the packets still get
dropped. As soon as I
Phil Mayers p.may...@imperial.ac.uk wrote:
I have a few 6500 Sup720/3BXL boxes running various releases of
12.2(33)SXI and SXJ that seem to drop all IPv6 fragments in transit as
soon as CoPP is enabled. There are no CoPP drops logged. Even when I
remove all police lines from the policy-map
Grzegorz Janoszka grzeg...@janoszka.pl wrote:
On 29-06-11 17:04, Bernhard Schmidt wrote:
I have a few 6500 Sup720/3BXL boxes running various releases of
12.2(33)SXI and SXJ that seem to drop all IPv6 fragments in transit as
soon as CoPP is enabled. There are no CoPP drops logged. Even when I
Richard Gallagher rgall...@cisco.com wrote:
Sup720 appears to be unable to handle the ipv6 fragments in HW,
therefore they will be sent to the CPU to be processed, if CoPP is on
and there are matching entries they will be matched and potentially
policed/dropped.
CSCsa78144 covers some of
Grzegorz Janoszka grzeg...@janoszka.pl wrote:
Richard Gallagher's suggestion about CSCsa78144 was really helpful in
our case and helped. Thanks!
FWIW, platform ipv6 acl fragment hardware forward fixed the drop for
me as well. But I still cannot see why it dropped before, since CoPP was
not
Grzegorz Janoszka grzeg...@janoszka.pl wrote:
Hi,
On 29-06-11 23:08, Bernhard Schmidt wrote:
FWIW, platform ipv6 acl fragment hardware forward fixed the drop for
me as well. But I still cannot see why it dropped before, since CoPP was
not dropping a single packet according to show policy-map
Bernhard Schmidt be...@birkenwald.de wrote:
we have a ME6524-GT series in a remote location that keeps dying on us
every couple of weeks. Symptoms are:
* All routing protocols and LLDP time out on our side
* Physically the box looks fine, Status LED and even the link LEDs are
still green
Hi,
we have a ME6524-GT series in a remote location that keeps dying on us
every couple of weeks. Symptoms are:
* All routing protocols and LLDP time out on our side
* Physically the box looks fine, Status LED and even the link LEDs are
still green
- I cannot really say something about the
Grzegorz Janoszka grzeg...@janoszka.pl wrote:
We recently upgraded one of our routers to 12.2(33)SXI3 (from SXF). Soon
after the upgrade one of our customers complained that he started to see
RA messages. From the beginning on his interface we have ipv6 nd ra
suppress, I added ipv6 nd ra
Hi,
first of all, I'm well aware of the limitations of 2960 series with
external RPS, they are only used here to have the very small advantage
to choose when the outage will be.
2* 2960G with RPS-2300 and dual powersupply. 2960 is on external power
feed. Is there any way to get back on the
On 06.03.2009 23:45, Gert Doering wrote:
On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 08:01:02AM +0100, Stig Johansen wrote:
Because of the borked ftp.cisco.com, I have generally used
ftp-sj.cisco.com instead, and it works just fine all the time.
Unfortunately, it doesn't. ftp-sj is also balanced to 4 different
Saku Ytti saku+cisco-...@ytti.fi wrote:
It turns out, I haven't been able to really connect to ftp.cisco.com
lately. This problem has persisted at least from 14th day, but may
have been there earlier.
With some persistence you can get some directory listings out from
there, but for all
Tolstykh, Andrew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Link to the release notes / new features etc.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst6500/ios/12.2SX/rel
ease/notes/ol_14271.html#wp4208036
Cisco promised us a lot of new IPv6-related features for SXI, including
IPv6 policy-based
Tim Durack wrote:
Hi,
I was hoping that
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst6500/ios/12.2SX/configuration/guide/vss.html
Software Features
With some exceptions, the virtual switching system has feature parity
with the standalone Catalyst 6500 series switch. Major
Brett Looney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
we want to use a Cisco 2821 as SIP-PSTN media gateway and PRI switch
for a slow migration from an old PBX to a VoIP PBX (Asterisk)
snip
CISCO2821-V/K9 2821 Voice Bundle,PVDM2-32,SP Serv,64F/256D
VWIC-2MFT-E1 2-Port RJ-48 Multiflex
Hello everyone,
we want to use a Cisco 2821 as SIP-PSTN media gateway and PRI switch for
a slow migration from an old PBX to a VoIP PBX (Asterisk)
| E1 carrier
+--+---+
| Cisco 2821 + IP/SIP to Asterisk
+--+---+
| E1 old PBX
Required key feature is
Hello everyone,
we are having a pretty serious problem with one of our boxes.
6509
2* WS-SUP720-BASE + WS-F6K-PFC3B running 12.2(33)SXH1 modular
1* WS-X6704-10GE
2* WS-X6724-SFP
2* WS-X6408A-GBIC
1* WS-SVC-NAM-2
1* WS-SVC-FWM-1 running 3.1(4)
The FWSM has 10 contexts in routing mode and 4
Justin M. Streiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only thing that seems to help in this mess is to reboot the FWSM.
Reload on the FWSM console does not work by the way (it seems to hang),
I had to use hw-module module 9 reset every time this happened so far.
Anyone having any ideas? I can get
Hi,
I'm currently trying to configure NAT-PT to allow our IPv6-only clients
to access IPv4 hosts. We've bought an 2811 for this task (among others)
and I tried following
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2t/ipv6/SA_natpt_ps6350_TSD_Products_Configuration_Guide_Chapter.html#wp1073195
Bernhard Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm currently trying to configure NAT-PT to allow our IPv6-only clients
to access IPv4 hosts. We've bought an 2811 for this task (among others)
and I tried following
Okay, I have to test these thoroughly tomorrow, but my preliminary
findings
38 matches
Mail list logo
