[c-nsp] ASR9K Max neighbors per bridge-domain & globally

Hello all, I've been trying to find platform limits for the maximum supported number of neighbors per bridge-domain and globally. Command "sh l2vpn capability" offers some good data, but not the number of max neighbors. I've also found some scattered pages on Cisco but nothing specific for max

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9k from 6.1.4 to 6.2.3

Hi Adam, We recently upgraded without any issue. Not using any exotic features though.. Mostly L2VPN (VPLS & VPWS) services and MPLS L3VPN in smaller scale. Beware of some rather minor syntax changes in the BNG config, that can can ruin your whole day (or night..or both..) You better try your

Re: [c-nsp] PPPoE termination on ASR9K without SE linecards

ards for LC termination. > > You can do it on rsp as the 9001 supports bng just fine. > > regards > > Brian > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of > > George Giannousopoulos > &

[c-nsp] PPPoE termination on ASR9K without SE linecards

Hello all, I hope for a positive answer on this.. Has anyone tried to terminate PPPoE on ASR9K *without SE LCs*, *but with SE RSPs*? I know I can terminate PPPoE on RSP which will affect system scalability in terms of sessions, but is it mandatory to have SE LCs as well? When I asked Cisco they

Re: [c-nsp] ASr-920 CONSOLE USB - USB

Hi, We also had some issues lately with the ASR900 family.. The ASR920-24SZ was working ok with the included USB cable, both on Windows and Linux The ASR903 refused to work with Linux-USB, but was working ok with Linux-RJ45, Windows-RJ45 and Windows-USB The ASR920-12SZ refused to work with

Re: [c-nsp] STM-1 over MPLS using ASR920

Hi, My understanding is that the OC3 module must be used when you need to transport channelized STM-1 or when you need to terminate multiple E1 circuits to a single STM-1 interface. I think TSOP Smart SFP supports only clear channel STM-1. I'm currently testing both scenarios and I'll be able to

[c-nsp] RSP failover vs Chassis failover for switch/router clusters

Hello all, I'd like to hear the community's opinion and experience when working with switch or router "clusters". By saying cluster I assume any kind of closely coupled systems, active/active or active/standby, such as VSS, vPC, mLACP. Also I assume that the cluster members will be physically

Re: [c-nsp] NCS4200 - re-badged ASR920 / ASR900 ?

Hi, Concerning IOS-XR on ASR-900 series, during a recent meeting with Cisco we were told that it's coming with RSP4.. Haven't heard anything for the ASR920 though.. -- George On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 10:17 AM, CiscoNSP List wrote: > Based on software roadmap, its

Re: [c-nsp] Building E-Trees

Hi, There is a newer document about split horizon groups, which is more clear. http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/routers/asr9000/software/asr9k_r5-1/lxvpn/configuration/guide/lesc51x/lesc51p2mps.html#68334 Split horizon groups are actually supported for PWs, provided that you have a

Re: [c-nsp] MPLS load-balancing on ME-3800X

Hi James , I believe the ASR920 is capable of load balancing on egress port channel. It depends of course on the hashing algorithm but certainly the actual payload must "contain" several flows that will be identified and will be sent to different members. Is that your case? -- George On 15 Dec

[c-nsp] STM-1 over MPLS using ASR920

Hello all, Has anyone ever tried to transport transparently STM-1 over MPLS using ASR920? Can you share your experiences and any issues you have possibly faced? Consider the following topology SDH #1 <=> ASR920 #1 <==MPLS==> ASR920 #2 <=> SDH #2 ASR920 supports the A900-IMA4OS which could be

Re: [c-nsp] asr 920 - lower mpls mtu?

Hi I guess you are configuring using "old style" config. Try using interface pseudowire and configure MTU inside it. -- George On Jun 18, 2016 19:57, "Mike" wrote: > > With all this talk of asr920, and having a new one in my trembling hands, > I have been

Re: [c-nsp] EoMPLS VC on Cisco 7609 is up, but with very small MTU (42 bytes)

Hi, Have you tried setting the MTU on the SVI to something more than the default 1500? Although 42 bytes isn't normal, you should anyway raise the MTU on each SVI in order to reach 9000. -- George On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Saku Ytti wrote: > Hey Eric, > > > I'd capture

Re: [c-nsp] mpls and etherchannel

Hi, Assuming that these devices are just P routers in your MPLS network, load balancing between these two will be based on the bottom label(VC label). So the only way to see traffic load balancing, is to have several different EoMPLS pseudowires with different bottom labels.. The fewer you have,

Re: [c-nsp] ISSU on nexus 5k with vPC/lacp

Hi, Today we upgraded a couple of N7Ks in one of our DCs. Everytime we ask cisco about ISSU the answer is "it's supported, it works, but why can't you perform a traditional upgrade?" Also after some bad experiences with ISSU in the past, we decided to just reload the boxes. All servers are dual

Re: [c-nsp] traceroute from ASA with source IP from inside interface

Hi, It's been a while since I tried that, but I think you are not allowed by default to ping an outside host using an inside interface as the source. Each interface can successfully ping only on it's egress direction unless you change the rules. -- George On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 2:26 PM, "Rolf

Re: [c-nsp] VPLS capable devices for two sites interconnect

Hi Adam, > The mLACP feature is not available on cheap Cisco devices (ASR920) I've seen a few documentation pages about mLACP on ASR920, like the following

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus / VPC - Management port "needed" in VPC?

Hi, I suggest you take a look at http://www.cisco.com/c/dam/en/us/td/docs/switches/datacenter/sw/design/vpc_design/vpc_best_practices_design_guide.pdf I believe it will answer most (if not all) of your concerns -- George On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 11:07 PM, CiscoNSP List

Re: [c-nsp] ASR903 Service instance MTU

Hi, I can't really test it right now, but you should be able to adjust MTU as a sub-command of xconnect, under the service instance. -- George On Sat, Nov 7, 2015 at 12:03 AM, Mohammad Khalil wrote: > Hi all > I was wondering on ASR903 , can I adjust MTU under the

Re: [c-nsp] ASR920 Microbursts

Hi, Are you sure the drops are due to microbursts? We have an ongoing issue with drops on ASR920 and TAC informed us that the same counter is used for the mismatched encapsulation packets too. That means, no matter how big your buffer is, you may still see some drops on your interface,

Re: [c-nsp] ASR 903 RSP2 Control Plane Traffic QOS

Hi Waris, Can you please let me know if this doc is specific to the ASR903 or is it common for the ASR9xx family? Thanks On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 3:40 AM, Waris Sagheer (waris) wa...@cisco.com wrote: Let me know if the following paper answers your question. If not I’ll ask my team to send out

Re: [c-nsp] me3800x IOS

Our experience with 15.3(3)S3 has been very good too. I can't recall any serious issues since we started using it. We primarily use OSPF/MPLS with LDP to implement L2VPNs -- George On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 12:23 AM, James Bensley jwbens...@gmail.com wrote: On 27 July 2015 at 17:25, Tim

Re: [c-nsp] 7600 on 15.3(3)S5

Hi, The only issue we had when we upgraded to 15.3.(3)S4 was some unsupported 10G transceivers.. Don't forget to check the SFP compatibility matrix before you proceed.. In our case we had a couple of XFP10GLR-192SR-L and XFP10GER-192IR-L on a 76-ES+T-4TG, which aren't supported anymore. --

Re: [c-nsp] Shaping pseudowire on ME3600-ME3600 (L2)

It works but you may need to include a dummy class, besides the class-default, in your policy map.. -- George On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote: On 08/07/2015 01:15, CiscoNSP List wrote: Question (As I dont have a pair of 3600's handy that I can test on

Re: [c-nsp] Shaping pseudowire on ME3600-ME3600 (L2)

Hi, In some certain cases you are not allowed to apply a policy-map which includes *only* class-default To workaround the issue you have to add a dummy class like the following example class-map match-any dummy match qos-group 99 policy-map 50M-OUTPUT-POLICY class dummy class class-default

Re: [c-nsp] OSPF per-prefix LFA

Hi Mohammad, It's not one or the other.. With OSPF tuning you improve convergence for sure and as others said, it's a good practice to do so. If you also implement LFA, you have an extra bonus in convergence time. On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Mohammad Khalil eng_m...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi

Re: [c-nsp] OSPF per-prefix LFA

Hi, In a similar case TAC advised that we should also enable OSPF tuning. Actually OSPF tuning is considered a prerequisite in order to take full advantage of the LFA feature.. Have you tried that? -- George On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote: This has

Re: [c-nsp] OSPF per-prefix LFA

Actually I was referring to the following timers timers throttle spf X X X timers throttle lsa X X X timers lsa arrival X timers pacing flood X On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 3:17 PM, Mohammad Khalil eng_m...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi Now , the main link is active again with hello/dead intervals

Re: [c-nsp] OSPF per-prefix LFA

I guess it depends on the values you configure.. But you need to be extra careful if you are going to apply on a production device.. As you have probably already noticed, after OSPF timers tuning, the convergence is quite fast even without the LFA.. So why would you bother to configure LFA in the

[c-nsp] ASR920 mLACP experience

Hello all, ASR920 seems to support mLACP with the Advanced Metro IP License. Has anyone experienced issues while using it in production network? I'm specifically interested in VPWS, where two Active/Active or Active/Standby pseudowires from a UNI are terminating on a couple of ASR920

Re: [c-nsp] ASR903 AToM

oops.. my mistake.. You need to configure *l2vpn vfi* instead of *l2vpn xconnect* Take a look at http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/mp_l2_vpns/configuration/xe-3s/asr903/mp-l2-vpns-xe-3s-asr903-book/mp-vpls.html On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Mohammad Khalil eng_m...@hotmail.com

Re: [c-nsp] ASR903 AToM

Hi, I'd use the following config for the service instances and the L2VPN I guess you can't use the service instance in the L2VPN, because of the bridge-domain command inside the service instance. service instance 1 ethernet encapsulation dot1q 100,200,300 rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric

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

Hi Gert, I have to admit your workaround came as a shock to me :) I can't help you on that, but I really wonder.. Even if it eventually works, will you trust it on your production network? Maybe it's ok for 1-2 days, but can you rely on that? What if a POE+ injector fails? Personally, in such

Re: [c-nsp] ASR920

Hi, I had the same issue while evaluating the box.. Unfortunately the documentation includes many features not currently supported by the platform. Personally I didn't find a better doc. To tell you the truth, I don't expect the documentation to be fixed, unless a customer complains. They'll

Re: [c-nsp] ME3600X - Hairpinning/Local Connect

Hi, This feature is supported in 15.3(2)S and newer images. Check http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios/15_3s/release/notes/15_3s_rel_notes/15_3s_feats_important_notes_15_3_2s.html I've tested it successfully in 15.3(3)S1a Best regards George On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 4:45 AM, Ivan

[c-nsp] ME3600X 24CX experience feedback

Hello all, We've been using the ME3600x for quite a long time without major issues. We are now considering using the ME3600X 24CX in cases we need higher 10G port density. Can anyone provide feedback about it? There is a different image for the 24CX model. Have you seen anything operating

Re: [c-nsp] Port-based EoMPLS treatment of l2protocol packets

Hi, That's correct.. forwarded l2protocols are incompatible with tunneled l2protocols Actually there are differences among Cisco platforms in respect to their ability to handle PDUs, which makes interoperability quite difficult some times. The ME3400 can only tunnel The ME3800x can tunnel and

Re: [c-nsp] Outdoor-hardened metro service platform?

You could check the ASR901 It is hardened and it supports an extended temperature range Currently it only supports MPLS/EoMPLS, but VPLS is coming this summer George On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Richard Hartmann richih.mailingl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear all, weirdly, the archives

[c-nsp] OSPF cost calculation on ASR9K

Hi, I've noticed that the ASR9K ignores the bandwidth command when it calculates the OSPF cost for an interface. No matter what the configured bandwidth is, the device calculates the cost according to the physical interface bandwidth. Is that normal or am I missing something? Thanks George

Re: [c-nsp] OSPF cost calculation on ASR9K

, 2014, at 3:33 pm, George Giannousopoulos ggian...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I've noticed that the ASR9K ignores the bandwidth command when it calculates the OSPF cost for an interface. No matter what the configured bandwidth is, the device calculates the cost according to the physical interface

Re: [c-nsp] EVC Question/Clarification

Hi, EVCs are used with CFM. In order to enable transparent flow of CFM packets through a service instance, you must associate the service instance with the evc. This is used only when the ME3600x/ME3800x itself, has globally enabled the CFM functionality. If CFM is not enabled on the device, then

Re: [c-nsp] MPLS QOS on ME3600 not working???

This could be a counter issue.. If the traffic is transit you can try to match it at the egress interface, without any policy at the ingress. You could also match it at the ingress of the next device to verify that. On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Adam Vitkovsky adam.vitkov...@swan.skwrote:

Re: [c-nsp] FAT PW between 7600 - ASR9K

Thanks for your feedback Oliver, since the documentation is very very limited, I'd appreciate if you could provide some info on how each PE will identify the flow labels. Is there a predefined range that is used only for the flow labels as Phil previously mentioned? George On Fri, Nov 1, 2013

Re: [c-nsp] FAT PW between 7600 - ASR9K

Ok. Got it. Thanks again On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) oboeh...@cisco.com wrote: George, Oliver, since the documentation is very very limited, I'd appreciate if you could provide some info on how each PE will identify the flow labels. Is there a predefined

[c-nsp] FAT PW between 7600 - ASR9K

Hello all, Does anyone have experience with FAT PW between 7600 and ASR9K? The ASR9K supports it for sure and it has been verified. The 7600, according to the doc, supports it only for VPLS with the addition of a global command platform vfi load-balance-label vlan . We have implemented all

Re: [c-nsp] ASR901 - L2 tunneling

Hi Psem, We also did some tests with the ASR901 and we had issues with l2protocol forwarding After some research with cisco, we concluded that - L2protocol tunnelling is not supported and there is no plan to support it - L2protocol forwarding is supported on EFPs only for untagged PDUs -

Re: [c-nsp] Routed Pseudowire

Hi Antonis, What IOS version are you running on the 7600? If you are on a 15.x train, you need at least 15.2(4)M In fact it is referenced in the 15.2(2)S release notes. On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:39 PM, Antonis Vosdoganis avo...@gmail.comwrote: Hello Arie We are using ES20+ Regards

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 7609-S - ME3600 / xconnect up - ac down

Hello, Are the two devices connected back to back? In order to use SVI based EoMPLS from 7600 to me3600x, you need the egress interface on the 7600 towards the me3600x to be on a ES+ module AND it must be configured as L3 ptp. Is that your case? George On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Antonis

Re: [c-nsp] ME3600X - tunning the output queues

Hi Pshem, We have seen the same issue with the 3800x In our case we use the maximum allowed packet number queue-limit 2457 packets If I'm not mistaken, there are improvements coming to the default queue sizes with the 15.3 train George On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 4:25 AM, Pshem Kowalczyk

Re: [c-nsp] ASR901 to ME3600X xconnect

Hello all, As far as I know, the MPLS-TE functionality is not supported on ASR901 yet We should expect it after mid 2013.. From http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/wireless/asr_901/Configuration/Guide/mpls_te-frr.html *The MPLS TE is supported on the Cisco ASR 901 router to enable only the FRR. The

Re: [c-nsp] me3400 EVC config help needed

On the 7600 side I'd use only the svlan encapsulation interface GigabitEthernet3/1 no ip address no cdp enable spanning-tree bpdufilter enable service instance 3 ethernet description Customer-10 encapsulation dot1q 10 xconnect x.x.x.x 1227 encapsulation mpls Which ios version are you using

Re: [c-nsp] ASR901 EoMPLS Customer COS bits trashed

Hello Caillin, We have also seen some issues with the ASR901 QoS In fact the config is very restricting at the moment.. What I know for sure is that the ingress cos markings are copied to the MPLS EXP bit, so you can try to remark your customer traffic at the other end George On Wed, Oct 10,

Re: [c-nsp] ME3600X Output Drops

5:48 p.m., George Giannousopoulos wrote: Hi Ivan, In fact the default queue limit in 3800x/3600x is quite small We also had issues with drops in all interfaces, even without congestion After some research and an SR with Cisco, we have started applying qos on all interfaces policy-map

Re: [c-nsp] asr901 - vlan-based eompls (l2vpn) supported ?

Hi Aaron, You aren't doing anything wrong.. SVI based EoMPLS isn't supported on ASR901 yet It is expected in Q1 2013.. Cheers George On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Aaron aar...@gvtc.com wrote: does vlan-based eompls l2vpn work on asr901 ? ...in 15.1(2)SNH ? i can't get it to work using

Re: [c-nsp] ME3600X Output Drops

Hi Ivan, In fact the default queue limit in 3800x/3600x is quite small We also had issues with drops in all interfaces, even without congestion After some research and an SR with Cisco, we have started applying qos on all interfaces policy-map INTERFACE-OUTPUT-POLICY class dummy class