Re: [c-nsp] Copying new IOS to 7600 resulting in IPC logs

ensley' <jwbens...@gmail.com>; 'Frank Bulk' <frnk...@iname.com>; 'Cisco-nsp List' <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Copying new IOS to 7600 resulting in IPC logs Is there a reason you need to use SCP? The crypto overhead is pretty massive. Granted it's more secure

Re: [c-nsp] Copying new IOS to 7600 resulting in IPC logs

No, I do not have anything set. What do you recommend for a value? Frank -Original Message- From: James Bensley Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 4:46 AM To: frnk...@iname.com; Cisco-nsp List Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Copying new IOS to 7600

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

This thread and the video might be interesting and relevant: http://markmail.org/thread/crgxdtqsbegf72ah Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Laurent Dumont Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:08 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net

[c-nsp] Monitoring queue drops/interface errors on 7600

Over the years there have been lots of posting about using "show" command outputs to identify various interface and resource issues. show interfaces gigabitEthernet 1/1 stat show interfaces gigabitEthernet 1/1 | inc drop show interfaces gigabitEthernet 1/1 counters errors

[c-nsp] Monitoring PoE usage

I have a Cisco 2960-48PST-L (running (15.0(2)SE6)) where we recently hit some power limits while upgrading some Aruba access points. I'd like to monitor this switch (and also a 3500 PoE switch) for power usage by building a NAGIOS plugin. What I don't understand is why the CLI reports 362.6

Re: [c-nsp] cs.co on IPv6

FYI, this came back up at 12:54 pm U.S. Central. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Joshua Riesenweber Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2015 6:06 PM To: Cisco Mailing list Subject: [c-nsp] cs.co on IPv6 Hi, Is anyone else having

Re: [c-nsp] cheat sheet for new netflow?

RANCID has saved me through several Cisco firmware upgrades. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Charles Sprickman Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 11:09 AM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net NSP Subject: [c-nsp] cheat sheet for new

Re: [c-nsp] Strange static MAC address entry is cisco 6500, anyone seen this?

Please open up a ticket with Cisco TAC so that this can be resolved. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Maarten Carels Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 3:34 AM To: Jay Ford Cc: Cisco Network Service Providers Subject: Re:

Re: [c-nsp] Single core fibre question

Well, if you have two strands then you can use the standard SFPs, but if it ends up being a single strand (for cost or other reason), then you'll need a pair of SFPs, where one side will TX at 1310 and RX at 1490 (or 1550), and the other side will TX at 1490 (or 1550) and RX at 1310, and then a

Re: [c-nsp] Full Duplex

Another example: vendors who sell new equipment and highlight the unit's phenomenal backplane...but none of their linecards can be configured in any kind of way even use it. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark Tinka Sent:

Re: [c-nsp] LACP Trunk between Cisco VSS and Brocade MLX.

] Sent: Friday, October 24, 2014 3:12 AM To: 'Frank Bulk' Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: [c-nsp] LACP Trunk between Cisco VSS and Brocade MLX. Hi Frank, Please find attached information requested. I've tried disabling lacp rate fast no joy. The working half of the trunk has

Re: [c-nsp] IPv6 BGP peers over SNMP

Do you happen to have the OIDs or MIB name for that info? Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Nick Hilliard Sent: Monday, September 22, 2014 4:22 PM To: chiel; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] IPv6 BGP peers over

Re: [c-nsp] Tapping a PPPoVPDN and/or PPPoE subscriber session the ASR1000

You haven't mentioned what kind of budget you have, but the first and third options are worth pursuing. If you don't like what the LI feature set can do on the ASR then it's really just the SPAN option, but you can use a product from a vendor like Gigamon to slim the traffic volume down to your

Re: [c-nsp] Strange corrupt DNS Cache in IOS

Don't use a router as a DNS resolver for customers. Just don't. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Sascha E. Pollok Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 5:56 AM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] Strange corrupt DNS

Re: [c-nsp] Strange corrupt DNS Cache in IOS

Right, but that's all non-Cisco. My comments were intended to be constrained to Cisco. Frank -Original Message- From: Jared Mauch [mailto:ja...@puck.nether.net] Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 9:42 AM To: Frank Bulk Cc: Sascha E. Pollok; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp

[c-nsp] Simple ACL not working 7600

this isn't working? We're running IOS 15.2(4)S5. Regards, Frank Bulk ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Re: [c-nsp] Simple ACL not working 7600

Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Roland Dobbins Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 8:09 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Simple ACL not working 7600 On Aug 5, 2014, at 7:17 AM, Frank Bulk frnk...@iname.com wrote: I applied an ACL

Re: [c-nsp] Simple ACL not working 7600

not working 7600 On Aug 5, 2014, at 9:01 AM, Frank Bulk frnk...@iname.com wrote: Unfortunately I'm not in the position to dictate which routers my residential subscribers use on their broadband connection, Is there anything in your AUP about customers running abusable services

Re: [c-nsp] 2 to 3% packet loss on single VLAN on LAG interface

[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Frank Bulk Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 2:19 AM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] 2 to 3% packet loss on single VLAN on LAG interface Looking for some tribal knowledge from this group -- we have a Cisco 7609-S running IOS 15.2(4

Re: [c-nsp] UDLD enabling port prematurely?

There also may be errdisable recovery times to say how long to wait before trying to come out of the errdisable state. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Peter Rathlev Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2014 4:38 AM To: Victor Sudakov

[c-nsp] 2 to 3% packet loss on single VLAN on LAG interface

? Regards, Frank Bulk ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Re: [c-nsp] Netflow analysis tools?

Scott, It looks like the Netflow monitoring of PRTG is only for 30 days -- if you want to try something that doesn't expire, but only has the last hour of information, look at SolarWinds' product: http://www.solarwinds.com/products/freetools/appflow-jflow-sflow-analyzer.aspx Frank

Re: [c-nsp] C7200 and AAA Accounting

Trying adding something along these lines: aaa accounting network radius-group-aaa start-stop group radius-group Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Chris Knipe Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2014 7:22 AM To:

Re: [c-nsp] Use NTP server for syncing but do not respond to NTP requests

It's not as good as an access-group, but I've applied ntp disable on each Vlan interface that I don't want to participate in NTP. It seems effective. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Nick Hilliard Sent: Saturday, March 22,

Re: [c-nsp] NTP DDoS

Two weeks ago one of our neighbors had a (non-Cisco) CMTS with an NTP config on the CMTS's management interface that resulted in a 120+ Mbps reflection... Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Alan Buxey Sent: Tuesday, February

[c-nsp] Looking for recommended IOS for 7600 RSP720CXL

towards 15.2(4)S4a -- anyone have reason to discourage us? Any upgrade surprises? Regards, Frank Bulk ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail

Re: [c-nsp] Transparent WAN Encryption

I've been working with MACsec over the last two weeks as a cheaper way to get some encryption in place over some lit paths. In our case I also manage the transport gear. I had to change a frame disposition setting on our transport gear because, by default, the Ethertype for the initial EAPOL

Re: [c-nsp] 7204VXR reboots

I don't believe there is a version of 12.2SR for the 7200's that supports both DHCPv6-PD static route insertion AND IPv6 PBR. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark Tinka Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2013 5:27 AM To: Gert Doering

Re: [c-nsp] RIPE 554, availability of required IPv6 features

You speak with your dollars... Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Gert Doering Sent: Saturday, November 24, 2012 12:23 PM To: Peter Rathlev Cc: cisco-nsp Subject: Re: [c-nsp] RIPE 554, availability of

Re: [c-nsp] IPv6 BGP peers over SNMP

This topic has been much discussed, but there's been little action. Some shops are scraping the CLI output. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Sander Steffann Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 5:58 AM

[c-nsp] DHCPv6-PD relay with static route insertion not working on 7609 when CE's DHCPv6 request goes through access platform's LDRA

Our 7609 running 12.2(33)SRE2 has been using DHCPv6-PD relay with static router insertion (with an external DHCPv6 server) for over a year now and it's worked quite well for customers on our access platform. The 7609 snoops the DHCPv6 responses and builds the static route like it's supposed to.

Re: [c-nsp] Broadcast storm Cisco Solution

Rich: Our access gear allows us to specify the DHCP directionality, which addresses this issue. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Nick Hilliard Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 11:21 AM To: Rich Trinkle

Re: [c-nsp] WLC Active users / SNMP

Try this: https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/330308 Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Andrew Miehs Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2012 7:52 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] WLC Active

Re: [c-nsp] Packet capturing

I assume you're using an Calix E5 or E7? If so, why not trying to port mirror off the Calix. You can then use display or capture filters to zero in on the VLAN you want to look at, though a capture filter on DHCP should be sufficient to make it a manageable stream to look at. Frank

Re: [c-nsp] Long range 10G ethernet?

You generally will save some light if you skip the intermediate patch cords and splice it through. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Peter Rathlev Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 5:14 AM To: Phil Mayers

Re: [c-nsp] ASR 1006 Code

A neighboring ISP has had an ASR1002 for about two years for BRAS + ISG functionality and it's still not stable. I can't count how many (beta) code releases Cisco has had him try. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net]

Re: [c-nsp] www.ipv6.cisco.com down for 5+ days

Just came back up -- thanks to anyone/everyone that moved this issue forward. Frank -Original Message- From: Frank Bulk [mailto:frnk...@iname.com] Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2012 3:00 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: www.ipv6.cisco.com down for 5+ days I sent an email

[c-nsp] www.ipv6.cisco.com down for 5+ days

fine. If anyone from Cisco is lurking could they reach out to the NOC or IT staff? Regards, Frank Bulk ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail

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

It's too bad that they don't have a release that supports both IPv6 PBR and DHCPv6-PD with static route insertion. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark Tinka Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 7:28 AM

Re: [c-nsp] Weird Multicast microburst amplification issue

What if you interconnect the two switches with 1G rather than 10? Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Matthew Huff Sent: Friday, December 09, 2011 2:18 PM To: 'Chuck Church'; 'cisco-nsp' Subject: Re:

Re: [c-nsp] Low-cost rate-shaping/policing switch

...@iname.com Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Low-cost rate-shaping/policing switch On Sunday, September 11, 2011 11:45:46 AM Frank Bulk wrote: What is the lowest-cost Cisco *switch* that does rate-limiting on the egress and policing on the ingress, on a per-port basis? My guess is that would

Re: [c-nsp] BGP IPv6 OIDs

Cisco's support for IPv6 aspects of CISCO-BGP4-MIB has been very poor. My TAC cases have gone nowhere -- they just confirm there's no support (i.e. CSCse32865). Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jon

[c-nsp] Low-cost rate-shaping/policing switch

We serve an MDU where would like to provide one of four tiers of speeds (128K/128K, 3M/512K, 8M/768K, and 15M/1M) to subscribers living in different apartments. What is the lowest-cost Cisco *switch* that does rate-limiting on the egress and policing on the ingress, on a per-port basis? Frank

Re: [c-nsp] NAT over Two different providers

Here's some good articles to read: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk648/tk361/technologies_configuration_examp le09186a0080950834.shtml http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk648/tk361/technologies_configuration_examp le09186a00808d2b72.shtml http://www.nil.com/ipcorner/SmallSiteMultiHoming/

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

TACACS+ will facilitate the ability to limit which commands are usable. http://my.safaribooksonline.com/book/networking/cisco-ios/0596527225/tacacsp lus/i13896__heada__4_2 Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On

Re: [c-nsp] WARNING: Netflow Data Export Hardware assisted NAT not supported on 76xx/65xx on the same interface

I agree with you: what ought to be, isn't. I don't make buying decisions based on what I would like vendors to do or what they should do, but what is. Until documentation matches reality, I will use consultants to help us with our due-diligence. Frank -Original Message- From:

Re: [c-nsp] Service Provider Anti-Spam

Mailchannels (http://mailchannels.com/) comes to mind. I don't have any experience with it, but it would seem to meet your product requirments. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Felix Nkansah Sent:

Re: [c-nsp] Platform feature development for 7200

notification for Prefix Delegation is available in 12.2(33)SRE3 on 7200 platform On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:19 AM, Frank Bulk frnk...@iname.com wrote: Just saw this today: This feature [DHCPv6-PD with automatic route insertion] is not yet supported on the T-Train. The feature in question

[c-nsp] Platform feature development for 7200

release. Regards, Frank Bulk ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Re: [c-nsp] Platform feature development for 7200

with automatic route insertion on the same code release. Regards, Frank Bulk ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp

Re: [c-nsp] Platform feature development for 7200

-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Frank Bulk - iName.com Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 3:45 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] Platform feature development for 7200 I learned from our SE today that platform feature development for the 7200 has ended, and that SB code train

Re: [c-nsp] IPv6 Support in Cisco IOS AnyConnect?

The missing IPv6 nameservers issue is described in BugID CSCtg92043. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Kaj Niemi Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 2:43 PM To: Chris Mason Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [c-nsp] IPv6 nd table on the 6500

What about in the 12.2SR code line? Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Tóth András Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 8:26 AM To: Phil Mayers Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] IPv6 nd table

Re: [c-nsp] ADSL errors

I vaguely recall having since this issue on our system, too. What IOS release are you running? Here's another posting on the issue (from 2007): http://www.ccie.pl/printview.php?t=4999start=0sid=04b8525fcdec2f2ad56e7dc3 be6c5513 Frank -Original Message- From:

Re: [c-nsp] ADSL errors

I believe this software is 5+ years old - I'd recommend that you upgrade. Frank From: Mohammad Khalil [mailto:eng_m...@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2011 4:36 PM To: frnk...@iname.com; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: RE: [c-nsp] ADSL errors Thanks Frank , below are the

Re: [c-nsp] 3845 maxing out at 400 Mbps

Emeriaud [mailto:petrus...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 12:18 PM To: frnk...@iname.com Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 3845 maxing out at 400 Mbps 2011/3/29 Frank Bulk frnk...@iname.com: Yes, I am running that HWIC! NAME: High Speed WAN Interface Card - 1 Port

Re: [c-nsp] 3845 maxing out at 400 Mbps

04:14, Frank Bulk wrote: We have two 3845's as border routers, each with three GigE interfaces (one facing upstream, the other downstream, the third facing the other 3845). The first 3845 has a typical packet-size mix (residential/business Internet) is consistently maxing out at 400 Mbps

Re: [c-nsp] 3845 maxing out at 400 Mbps

I agree. It's just that I have an identical router that's set up identically with slightly lower ingress but higher total ingress + egress numbers, and can go over 40%. Frank -Original Message- From: Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists [mailto:li...@hojmark.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 3:01

Re: [c-nsp] 3845 maxing out at 400 Mbps

Let me clear the air and say that I'm very happy with the performance of our 3845s -- they've done much better than even our consulting company thought they would. They need to last just a few more weeks until the new border routers we ordered come in and we turn them up. I just need to buy a

[c-nsp] 3845 maxing out at 400 Mbps

We have two 3845's as border routers, each with three GigE interfaces (one facing upstream, the other downstream, the third facing the other 3845). The first 3845 has a typical packet-size mix (residential/business Internet) is consistently maxing out at 400 Mbps (predominately ingress because of

Re: [c-nsp] 3845 maxing out at 400 Mbps

- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Tony Varriale Sent: Monday, March 28, 2011 10:24 PM To: cisco-nsp Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 3845 maxing out at 400 Mbps On 3/28/2011 9:14 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: We have two 3845's as border routers, each

Re: [c-nsp] DHCP_PD usage for PPPoE Access

Why would the IPv6 address on the WAN interface ever be seen? Clients attached to the CE router would be using the delegated prefix... Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Miquel van Smoorenburg Sent:

Re: [c-nsp] DHCP_PD usage for PPPoE Access

This approach was discouraged ipv6-ops listserv and one person pointed out that this violates an RFC: http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/2011-January/004677.html Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf

Re: [c-nsp] DHCP_PD usage for PPPoE Access

address for connections originating from the CPE ? Like SIP ? In all those cases, the WAN address is used for outgoing connections. Mike. On 25-03-11 9:16 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: Why would the IPv6 address on the WAN interface ever be seen? Clients attached to the CE router would be using

Re: [c-nsp] DHCP_PD usage for PPPoE Access

(or something that has the same effect - in fact it should behave like that by default) Mike. On 25-03-11 10:03 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: This approach was discouraged ipv6-ops listserv and one person pointed out that this violates an RFC: http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/2011-January

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

No, the FTTH doesn't allow broadcasts, at all. =( Right now the ARP timeout is 480 seconds, CAM is 540 seconds, and the FTTH's FDB is 900 seconds. If the CPE had a reasonable ARP timeout, it would refresh the ARP entry for it's default gateway (7609) upon the first CPE-initiated packet after a

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

the feeling I'm missing something here though. Maybe it only allows broadcast for a specific interval after it detects a link down/link up. On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Frank Bulk frnk...@iname.com mailto:frnk...@iname.com mailto:frnk...@iname.com mailto:frnk

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

. I get the feeling I'm missing something here though. Maybe it only allows broadcast for a specific interval after it detects a link down/link up. On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Frank Bulk frnk...@iname.com mailto:frnk...@iname.com wrote: Thanks for explaining. Since

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

There's no way for a smart L2 could compensate for the broadcast issue. With a broadcast ARP the MAC address is not known, unlike a unicast ARP where it is. So the only way for that broadcast ARP to make it to the CPE, which is unknown, is to blast it out to all the FTTH ports. The FTTH vendor

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

sent when the L2 mapping isn't known. Rodney On 1/10/11 5:27 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: Thanks for explaining. Since the Linksys BEFRS41 does not ARP regularly, even after a DHCP RENEW and DHCP DISCOVER, and because the access gear blocks all broadcast traffic, the 7609-S will never (re

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

VLAN per customer provides L2 separation/protection and would avoid the problems we've had. Just I don't like the (lack of) scalability of (extra) management of that approach. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

07:47, Frank Bulk - iName.com wrote: Keegan: You're correct - without broadcast support, re-population initiated from the 7609 is impossible. Once it's expired, the FTTH access gear's design, which blocks broadcast traffic, makes it impossible for the CPE to respond to the I'm confused

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

Gert, you couldn't be more insightful: I did a software upgrade of the 7609 a few weeks ago, which led our helpdesk to raise this issue to me. Frank -Original Message- From: Gert Doering [mailto:g...@greenie.muc.de] Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 3:54 AM To: Frank Bulk - iName.com Cc

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

Does the ARP cache get populated, or updated, if the traffic comes into an L3 interface, or is it only populated upon a successful ARP response? Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Rodney Dunn Sent:

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

: Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness It only gets updated on getting and ARP packet from the host. It is not updated based on L3 data level traffic flowing to/from the host. Rodney On 1/10/11 11:43 AM, Frank Bulk wrote: Does the ARP cache get populated, or updated, if the traffic comes into an L3

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

Message- From: Rodney Dunn [mailto:rod...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 8:01 PM To: frnk...@iname.com Cc: 'Keegan Holley'; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness On 1/3/11 11:13 PM, Frank Bulk - iName.com wrote: The 7609 does stop ARPing after

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

AM, Frank Bulk frnk...@iname.com wrote: Yes, broken spoke would be one thing to call it. Another cisco-nsp reader guessed what FTTH platform I have, because they've seen the same issue. I've also posted on the vendor's closed web forum and I'll see if I get any responses there. With the current

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

-- Global 300 no vlan age other than global age configured These may also be causing the troubles you are seeing. You may want to increase these timers to keep the SUP and MFSC aging closer to in-sync. - Jared On Jan 3, 2011, at 11:13 PM, Frank Bulk - iName.com wrote: The 7609

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

about ARP expiration makes sense. Thanks, Frank -Original Message- From: Rodney Dunn [mailto:rod...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 8:01 PM To: frnk...@iname.com Cc: 'Keegan Holley'; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness On 1/3/11 11:13 PM, Frank Bulk

[c-nsp] ARP strangeness

We have over a thousand FTTH customers hanging off a VLAN on our 7609-S running 12.2SRE3. Those who have Linksys BEFRS41 (wired-only routers) are complaining about lack of Internet access after many hours or days of idle time (not using their PC or other devices). Those who have Linksys WRT54G

Re: [c-nsp] ARP strangeness

source-destination ip pair. If nothing strange pops up then it's probably a bug. Sent from my iPhone On Jan 3, 2011, at 12:58 PM, Frank Bulk frnk...@iname.com wrote: We have over a thousand FTTH customers hanging off a VLAN on our 7609-S running 12.2SRE3. Those who have Linksys BEFRS41 (wired-only

Re: [c-nsp] c3750x upgrade to 12.2(55)SE1 takes forever

Would this apply to the 3750 Metro, too? Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Nick Hilliard Sent: Monday, December 20, 2010 12:28 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] c3750x upgrade to

Re: [c-nsp] Freeing up an internal use VLAN on a 6509/Sup2/12.1(E) Native mode box

We ended marking those VLAN numbers as unavailable, and if your transport provider should be to use VLAN translation/re-tagging to accommodate your environment. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jason

Re: [c-nsp] Bridging 802.1q tagged Ethernet traffic to multiple T-1 in a DS-3

Internet LLC mksm...@adhost.com w: +1 (206) 404-9500 f: +1 (206) 404-9050 PGP: B49A DDF5 8611 27F3 08B9 84BB E61E 38C0 (Key ID: 0x9A96777D) -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp- boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Frank Bulk Sent: Wednesday

[c-nsp] Bridging 802.1q tagged Ethernet traffic to multiple T-1 in a DS-3

Is it possible to use a Cisco 7206VXR to bridge 802.1q tagged Ethernet traffic to multiple T-1s within a DS-3? The remote end, a RNC, can apparently take tagged traffic over multiple T-1's. We might be willing to live with the restriction of assigning certain T-1's within the DS-3 to a certain

Re: [c-nsp] Migrating to a 7200 for DSL aggregation

You haven't mentioned current and anticipated PPS requirement. If it's really just one DS3 then a 7200VXR with NPE-G2 should be fine, otherwise if your needs were 100+ Mbps and growing, the ASR1K, I'm told, is a good box. We use 12.2(31)SB18 -- the latest in that series, but only because of a

Re: [c-nsp] Safe debug commands for ATM DSL PPPoE troubleshooting?

Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. I strongly endorse using debug conditions to minimize the chance of locking up. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of P C Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2010 11:23 AM

Re: [c-nsp] QPPB on Cisco 3750-ME

Is this a feature that only works on the ES ports of that switch? Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Chris Mason Sent: Monday, July 26, 2010 12:01 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] QPPB

Re: [c-nsp] Logging Server

Did you look at Xangati, too, and if so, what did you think of it? Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jeff Wojciechowski Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 10:01 AM To: Walter Keen; Mohammad Khalil;

Re: [c-nsp] Cheapest Cisco desktop switch that supports Q-in-Q/802.1Q VLAN encapsulation/double-tagged VLANs/Stacked VLANs

So it sounds like if an end-customer wants an *untagged* port off of an SP switch that there aren't any/many options to deliver double-tagged traffic to that SP switch. Sounds like we can have double-tagged traffic between the core and distribution, but when we bring it to the edge we need to

Re: [c-nsp] Cheapest Cisco desktop switch that supports Q-in-Q/802.1Q VLAN encapsulation/double-tagged VLANs/Stacked VLANs

Thanks for explaining the semantical differences. What I'm looking to do is the termination -- wouldn't the ME3400 do the trick? Frank -Original Message- From: sth...@nethelp.no [mailto:sth...@nethelp.no] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 3:56 AM To: frnk...@iname.com Cc:

[c-nsp] Cheapest Cisco desktop switch that supports Q-in-Q/802.1Q VLAN encapsulation/double-tagged VLANs/Stacked VLANs

What is the cheapest Cisco desktop switch that supports Q-in-Q? Is it the ME-3400G-2CS-A? We prefer the encapsulation dot1q x second-dot1q y approach. And why does one page on Cisco's site say: Q. What is 802.1Q Tunneling? Is it an IEEE standard? A. With 802.1Q Tunneling, a service provider's

Re: [c-nsp] Cheapest Cisco desktop switch that supports Q-in-Q/802.1Q VLAN encapsulation/double-tagged VLANs/Stacked VLANs

To: frnk...@iname.com Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cheapest Cisco desktop switch that supports Q-in-Q/802.1Q VLAN encapsulation/double-tagged VLANs/Stacked VLANs On Jul 7, 2010, at 10:54 PM, Frank Bulk wrote: And why does one page on Cisco's site say: Q. What is 802.1Q

Re: [c-nsp] ospf monitor

Attached is a NAGIOS module that I've put together. Frank -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Michael Sprouffske Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 2:38 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] ospf monitor

Re: [c-nsp] Radius Accounting Question

We use accounting to start/stop an internet filtering service for customer who've signed up, and we've not had an issue with RADIUS accounting. We added aaa accounting update periodic 480 jitter maximum 600 to help catch an hiccups on the internet filtering device if it loses state on a

Re: [c-nsp] Missing BGP MIB support on Cisco 2621

://tools.cisco.com/ITDIT/MIBS/MainServlet?ReleaseSel=0PlatformSel=0fsS el=0IMAGE_NAME=c2600-is4-mz.123-26.binSUBMIT2=Submit HTH Ziv -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Frank Bulk - iName.com Sent: Friday, February 19

[c-nsp] Missing BGP MIB support on Cisco 2621

According to Cisco's MIB Locator, c2600-is4-mz.123-26.bin should have CISCO-BGP4-MIB support, but when I try to walk that part of the tree (1.3.6.1.4.1.9.9.187) in v1 or v2c that fails. I'm using this router to do IPv6 tunneling, and the only routes exchanged on this router are IPv6. Anyone else

[c-nsp] Dynamic IP VPN clients on a dual-ISP ASA 5505

. Regards, Frank Bulk ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Re: [c-nsp] OT - Infoblox vs. Bluecat

We've been using Bluecat for several years in a SP environment primarily for DHCP and we've had a tough go of it, with the product, people, and support (contact me off-list for more detail). Based on our experience, I think it's a better fit in an enterprise environment with a single DHCP/DNS

Re: [c-nsp] Unicast flooding?

, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Frank Bulk frnk...@iname.com wrote: We've been seeing some strange behavior on our 7609-S running 12.2(33r)SRB4. We have a VLAN (with four /24s) configured on three ports across two 10/100/1000 blades facing some FTTH transport equipment. Customers hanging off the FTTH

  1   2   3   >