Re: [c-nsp] Nexus 3548 No Traffic on a Port

Khagendra: have you seen a license for them that’s speed-specific? I’m only aware of the license that enables the second bank of 24 ports... but always at 10gb. -Bill > On Jun 21, 2019, at 06:03, Mike Hammett wrote: > > Interesting... I'll look into that. > > > >

Re: [c-nsp] ASR 1k vs 9k as a non-transit BGP router with full tables?

>> On 3 Aug 2017, at 09:10, Patrick M. Hausen wrote: >> >> The use case is simply "full tables BGP" with currently 4x 1GB/s >> uplinks and possibly 6 in the near future. Upgrade to something >> 10G-ish not planned at the moment. 300-400 Mbit/s aggregate >> traffic across all

Re: [c-nsp] ASR 1k vs 9k as a non-transit BGP router with full tables?

> On Aug 2, 2017, at 3:10 AM, Patrick M. Hausen wrote: > My preferred supplier just called in telling me that ASR 9001 are way more > expensive > currently than, say, ASR 1002 with RP2. I'll get a quote later today. > ASR 9006 OTOH are rather cheap for their capabilities he

Re: [c-nsp] Equipment for a large-ish LAN event

> On Dec 8, 2015, at 5:19 PM, Laurent Dumont wrote: > * We are planning for slightly over 2000 seats(players). Okay. I think right now you’re making this more complicated than you need to. If you need 2000x 1G access ports, the easiest way to aggregate that up

Re: [c-nsp] Equipment for a large-ish LAN event

> Our actual port requirements and somewhat flexible but we do need at least > 4x10G Fiber ports. And at least 48 GigE ports for players or access switches. It will be a lot easier for people to give you substantive answers if you’re more specific. How many users do you need to accommodate?

Re: [c-nsp] The Family of ASR902 - ASR903 - ASR907

> It seems quite scalable and seems to have a nice path to higher density > ethernet with the RSP3 supporting (8) 10 gig, (2) 40 gig and (1) 100 gig Please correct me if I’m wrong, as I may be overlooking something, but only the 8x1g and 1x10g are actually available, and only with the RSP3, and

Re: [c-nsp] The Family of ASR902 - ASR903 - ASR907

> On Oct 28, 2015, at 9:27 AM, Bill Woodcock <wo...@pch.net> wrote: > >> It seems quite scalable and seems to have a nice path to higher density >> ethernet with the RSP3 supporting (8) 10 gig, (2) 40 gig and (1) 100 gig > > Please correct me if I’m wrong, as

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus 9300

On May 26, 2015, at 5:42 PM, Phil Bedard phil...@gmail.com wrote: We recently found out some of the FEX modules are also not supported yet on the 9372. Things like dual homed FEX is also bot supported yet, but we were aware of that. The 9300 if I'm not mistaken has the additional chip

Re: [c-nsp] Alternate to TOR (4948)

On Apr 14, 2015, at 5:24 PM, CiscoNSP List cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com wrote: Thanks Bill - So you've been happy with the Nexus? Have you moved from the Cat range to Nexus? Yes, entirely, as of about two years ago. Very happy with them. -Bill

Re: [c-nsp] Alternate to TOR (4948)

On Apr 14, 2015, at 4:08 PM, CiscoNSP List cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi Everyone, Been using the old 4948's for TOR, and have been happy with them, but as they are EOL'd, looking at an alternate4948E are getting up there in price. Nexus 3000's ? (Option to do VPC with

Re: [c-nsp] Non Cisco SFP

On Feb 2, 2015, at 11:28 AM, Charles Sprickman sp...@bway.net wrote: On Feb 2, 2015, at 2:19 PM, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote: On 2/Feb/15 18:46, Warren Jackson wrote: Sure, no problem! 1) Lack of Cisco support. You will find yourself behind the eight-ball dealing with the

Re: [c-nsp] Non Cisco SFP

On Feb 2, 2015, at 7:29 AM, Rick Martin rick.mar...@arkansas.gov wrote: We are also looking at aftermarket DAC or Twinax cables, what has been your experience with those in a Cisco environment? We have had a couple dozen Dell DAC's connecting Dell servers to HP 5900's with good success but

Re: [c-nsp] Peer pointing default route to us

On Sep 29, 2014, at 2:37 PM, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote: We generally use dedicated peering routers that don't carry the full table. Then how do you forward the miscreant’s ping and traceroute traffic? :-) -Bill signature.asc Description:

Re: [c-nsp] cisco 4451

On Sep 12, 2014, at 9:26 AM, Scott Voll svoll.v...@gmail.com wrote: Anyone have a 4451 in production? any concerns with it? anything to watch out for? We have one of them, but with a pretty simple config, and not under any very heavy load. With the 2gbps license. No issues so far.

Re: [c-nsp] Height of ASR9010?

On Jul 19, 2014, at 10:43 PM, Hank Nussbacher h...@efes.iucc.ac.il wrote: I am trying to determine the height of an ASR9010. One Cisco site says 17.50inch: and another site says 36.75inch: The 17.5” one is the ASR9006. The ASR9010 is the 36.75” one. -Bill

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco model recommendation

We like the 4500X and the Nexus 3548. -Bill On Jun 17, 2014, at 15:59, Jeremy Bresley b...@brezworks.com wrote: On 6/17/2014 3:13 PM, David Paul Zimmerman wrote: Although Cisco puts this switch in the data center product line, the Catalyst 4948E is nice for campus

Re: [c-nsp] Is the Nexus 3064PQ usable ?

We have a bunch of 3064s, and were very happy with them. We switched to the 3172 when those came out, and have been happy with those as well. The new 9396’s look good, and we’re about to start evals on those. -Bill signature.asc Description: Message

Re: [c-nsp] Basic BGP Cisco Router

Yep, a 2901 should do you fine, if you add one more routed GigE, or a four-port switched GigE, depending on your needs. One up from that, the 2921 is a router we use a lot of, and are happy with. -Bill On May 25, 2014, at 13:47, Dan Brisson dbris...@uvm.edu wrote:

[c-nsp] Cisco to support flow spec?

On Mar 21, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Justin M. Streiner strei...@cluebyfour.org wrote: The last I heard (in the past month) was that this was a 2014 roadmap item. I don't if it's EC'd for a specific version yet, nor do I know what platforms will be supported. My guess would be ASR9K/1K, Nexus