Thanks
good point on LACP Fast, we'll test it.
RSTP should be in any case slower than 3 seconds with LACP FAST.
Cheers
James
Il giorno lun 6 mag 2024 alle ore 15:22 Saku Ytti ha scritto:
> On Mon, 6 May 2024 at 15:53, james list via cisco-nsp
> wrote:
>
> > The questio
and there is a communication
failure.
The question: since the PO remains up, why we see this behaviour ?
are BDPU sent just over one link (ie the higher interfac e) ?
how can we solve this issue keeping this scenario ?
moving to RSTP could solve ?
Thanks in advance
Cheers
James
here some logs:
May 6 11:48:35.590
hi
I'd like to test with LACP slow, then can see if physical interface still
flaps...
Thanks for your support
Il giorno dom 11 feb 2024 alle ore 18:02 Saku Ytti ha
scritto:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2024 at 17:52, james list wrote:
>
> > - why physical interface flaps in DC1 if it is rel
: Interface
Ethernet1/44 is down (Initializing)
Il giorno dom 11 feb 2024 alle ore 14:36 Saku Ytti ha
scritto:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2024 at 15:24, james list wrote:
>
> > While on Juniper when the issue happens I always see:
> >
> > show log messages | last 440 | match LACPD_TIMEOUT
: CURRENT
Il giorno dom 11 feb 2024 alle ore 14:10 Saku Ytti ha
scritto:
> Hey James,
>
> You shared this off-list, I think it's sufficiently material to share.
>
> 2024 Feb 9 16:39:36 NEXUS1
> %ETHPORT-5-IF_DOWN_PORT_CHANNEL_MEMBERS_DOWN: Interface
> port-channel101 is
Hi
1) cable has been replaced with a brand new one, they said that to check an
MPO 100 Gbs cable is not that easy
3) no errors reported on both side
2) here the output of cisco and juniper
NEXUS1# sh interface eth1/44 transceiver details
Ethernet1/44
transceiver is present
type is
50
et-0/1/5 Partner 32768 b0:8b:cf:83:49:5b 32768
429 100
Il giorno dom 11 feb 2024 alle ore 13:07 Gert Doering
ha scritto:
> HI,
>
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 12:50:32PM +0100, james list wrote:
> > 2024 Feb 9 16:39:36 NEXUS1 %ETHPORT-5-IF_DOWN_PORT_CH
f your interfaces on DC1
> links do not go down
>
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2024, 21:16 Igor Sukhomlinov via cisco-nsp <
> cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi James,
>>
>> Do you happen to run the same software on all nexuses and all MXes?
>> Do the DC1 and DC2 bgp
yes same version
currently no traffic exchange is in place, just BGP peer setup
no traffic
Il giorno dom 11 feb 2024 alle ore 11:16 Igor Sukhomlinov <
dvalinsw...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> Hi James,
>
> Do you happen to run the same software on all nexuses and all MXes?
> Do t
James
Il giorno dom 11 feb 2024 alle ore 11:12 Gert Doering
ha scritto:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 11:08:29AM +0100, james list via cisco-nsp wrote:
> > we notice BGP flaps
>
> Any particular error message? BGP flaps can happen due to many different
> reasons, and u
the interconnetion at DC1 without any solution.
SFP we use in both DCs:
Juniper - QSFP-100G-SR4-T2
Cisco - QSFP-100G-SR4
over MPO cable OM4.
Distance is DC1 70 mt and DC2 80 mt, hence is less where we see the issue.
Any idea or suggestion what to check or to do ?
Thanks in advance
Cheers
James
to 1s, but not CSCO. I'm not sure if this
> is the only problem, as insufficient data is shown about the state and
> LACP PDUs.
>
> I believe the command is 'lacp rate fast' or 'lacp period short', to
> reduce risk of operators getting bored, In your case, the former.
>
> On S
anyone ever experienced the same ? Any suggestions ?
Thanks in advance for any hint
Kind regards
James
JUNIPER *
> show configuration interfaces ae10 | display set
set interfaces ae10 description "to Cisco leaf"
set interfaces ae10 aggregated-ether-options la
l get that an execute it. That script can
then do whatever you want, i.e. download an image file, a config file, and run
the commands to apply/install the image and apply the config.
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
htt
65x-ncs540/b-system-management-cg-65x-ncs540_chapter_01000.html
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
For this exact reasons, a few customers (myself included) had asked Cisco tu
support
Pseudowire Head-End (PWHE) interface to be supported under HSRP, since PWHE can
shape.
This feature should have been added in recent eXR versions (7.x), but I haven't
looked
for it mys
t those are followed, otherwise you cannot
complain, am I wrong ?
James
Il giorno dom 23 gen 2022 alle ore 18:37 Gert Doering
ha scritto:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 06:31:40PM +0100, james list wrote:
> > thanks for the feedback.
> >
> > Firewall vendor
point of view, since RFC6691 state "MUST use 536", the customer is
not compliant.
What do you think ?
Cheers
Il giorno dom 23 gen 2022 alle ore 17:40 Gert Doering
ha scritto:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2022 at 05:10:42PM +0100, james list wrote:
> > I suspect the current Cis
is being exchanged in the TLS session...
Thanks in advance
Cheers
James
___
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/
s had the logical bundle MAC and
sometimes had the member link MAC, and it was inconsistent).
So it seems these chips have issues with MAC address consistency. I'm wondering
if there is some relation to what you are seeing.
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp ma
Hi
just tested and police rate x pps is only applicable to control plane
Cheers
Il giorno mer 8 set 2021 alle ore 15:51 Lukasz Bromirski <
luk...@bromirski.net> ha scritto:
> Saku is always on point ;)
>
> > On 8 Sep 2021, at 15:31, Saku Ytti wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 8 Sept 2021 at 16:30, Lukasz
Thanks
I would try to apply both Bps OR pps if possible
Cheers
Il Mer 8 Set 2021, 15:51 Lukasz Bromirski ha scritto:
> Saku is always on point ;)
>
> > On 8 Sep 2021, at 15:31, Saku Ytti wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 8 Sept 2021 at 16:30, Lukasz Bromirski
> wrote:
> >
> >>> 3) is there any mode to
PM_LIMIT_INGRESS
*
Can you please confirm:
1) I'll not drop/limit other traffic
2) ASR1001X applies rate limit in hardware and not in software (in order to
avoid CPU overload)
3) is there any mode to limit pps and not only bandwidth
Thanks in advance
Cheers
James
, or for example that our financial exposure because
of this exact feature is 1.21 gigawatts. Not let the uneducated powers
that be tell me it's fine to keep this feature they don't understand
:)
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.net
+ TI-LFA + PIC etc.
This is why I say they aren't show stoppers, they're unlikely to be triggered
and there are SMUs for all we've encountered. So just look through the SMU list
and see what's relevant yo your setup.
Cheers,
James.
On 29 July 2021 19:48:09 UTC, Erik Sundberg wrote:
>J
lide
(A9K-48X10GE-1G-TR) and Lightspeed+ (A9K-20HG-FLEX-TR) cards; using mix of
400G-FR4, 100G-LRs and 10GEs.
So far no problems, besides some cosmetic issues (constant syslog spamming of
plat_sl_client), but we're not doing anything complex, just IP traffic.
James
_
Hi
I've to ask for the VM routing table and then I will share.
VM gateway is load balancer.
Cheers
James
Il giorno gio 29 lug 2021 alle ore 18:17 Ryan Rawdon ha
scritto:
>
> > On Jul 29, 2021, at 11:55 AM, james list wrote:
> >
> >
> > Internet - Firewall
?
Thanks in advance
James
___
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/
On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 at 21:37, Drew Weaver wrote:
> Not sure how that would've gotten through QA but I am glad it was finally
> fixed in newer hardware.
You assume there was any QA.
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.neth
added: 0
Bytes added: 0
Thanks in advance for any hint.
Cheers
James
___
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/
the possibility to use VXLAN to extend
L2...
Also any recommendation/hint/experience can be shared is appreciated.
Thanks in advance for your help
Cheers
James
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
0.25.11/95, local label: 165
>Dataplane:
> SSM segment/switch IDs: 90237/65659 (used), PWID: 24
>VC statistics:
> transit packet totals: receive 442, send 1
> transit byte totals: receive 31804, send 90
> transit packet drops: receive 0, seq error 0
though.
It looks like you're trying to route leak loopback interface IP's
though - if that is accurate, you can create another loopback
interface within the VRF with the same IP(s) as your GRT loopback.
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
w:
MPLS Local Remote
--
...
PW type Ethernet Ethernet
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
en have other
S-VLANs being bridged somewhere else. If everything that comes into
the port-channel can go to the Nexus just relax the EVC encapsulations
to capture everything. It sounds to me like the L2 topology is being
split by this ME3600, so I'd definitely try and find another design
instead.
What hardware platforms are operators running as P routers for smaller MPLS
networks? I’m not interested in large CRS type platforms, but simply an LSR
thats main function is MPLS switching at 10/40/100G speeds. Preferably
Cisco. Anyone have a recommendation based on experience?
or compliance based
requirements that are linked to EoL dates?
2. What have you sold to your customers? I have worked on networks
which have stated in the signed contracts with the customers that a
certain level of vendor support will be maintianed.
Cheers,
James.
_
64-bit now, because new HW
(99xx chassis, Lightspeed LCs) will only run on eXR.
HTH,
James
___
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/
perfect, but you need something
like this...
control-plane
management-plane
inband
interface XXX
allow SNMP peer
address ipv4 172.20.18.0/28
Have tried the various debug commands to see why your packets are
being dropped? If not, add the control-plane r
ls like NAPALM and
Nornir. Then you can automate the changes and automate the testing of
the changes, and the rollback if required, in either multiple stages
or as one giant change; whatever suits your circumstances best.
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-ns
On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 at 20:29, Mike wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I got another one -
>
> Playing with my asr920 I have it working as a pppoe server. I notice
> that if I have a radius attribute returned "Filter-Id" with the name of
> a filter already on the box, the pppoe session doesn't come up and
On 15 September 2020 10:17:09 CEST, "t...@pelican.org" wrote:
>On Monday, 14 September, 2020 19:38, "Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN"
> said:
>
>> On Sat, Sep 12, 2020, at 11:25, James Bensley wrote:
>>
>>> In your specific case/example; if I have a
On 13 September 2020 05:37:11 CEST, aar...@gvtc.com wrote:
>Hi James, I'm coming into this conversation late or mid-point, but as a
>thought, if 1 of those 500 routers goes down, you need to know about
>that
>individual router's ospf state dropping. How else would you know that
e down. There are two sides to
every coin.
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
f be created by the radius attribute if it does not exist?
No. The VRF must already exist.
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
ock solid apart from one outstanding bug we have open with Cisco
which relates to RP failover, so it won't apply to you on an
ASR1002-X.
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/c
l peer lacp
> xconnect x.x.x.x 1234 encapsulation mpls pw-class Raw-Mode-VC5
>mtu 1600
What happens if you change each interface to be "channel-group 1 mode
on" and remove "l2protocol peer lacp" to disable LACP and remove it
from the equation?
Cheers,
James.
te devices in the future, I'd
choose the static route method. If you do, I'd then choose BGP. I see
an IGP protocol like OSPF/ISIS/EIGRP as a last resort and/or for some
special exceptions.
Hopefully that helps.
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list c
> B has an eBGP neighborship with Router D.
How does Router A have an eBGP session with Router C if they have the same ASN?
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http
vlans also if in each vlan
there are very few systems ( 3 o 4 servers, etc).
My question is: how did you manage the issue in case you faced it?
Private vlans?
Keep in mind we need to have a non stop environment and hence any possible
way forward must forecast it.
Cheers
James
On Tue, 14 Jul 2020 at 06:20, Saku Ytti wrote:
>
> On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 at 20:39, James Bensley
> wrote:
>
> > Back in the 7600s it was NPU based, and what we call NPUs today are
> > sometimes a collection of ASICs that form a "complex of ASICs". That
> >
evices, often ASICs working together. So I don't think that
we have no ASICs like in the classic Ethernet switch you mention, but
we have groups of them now with other components too, forming
something more complex.
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing li
t set of instruction depending on
> packet/config
- NPUs also have function specific silicon too e.g. TOPs (Task
Optimised Processors) which exist in ASR9K NPUs, but not in Trio, but
they also run uCode and have a very small amount of flexibility.
Cheers,
James.
___
ther IOS-XRs have seen a similar
> error message.
Hi Hank,
If this is accurate, I strongly recommend you to really tighten up
your management plane ACLs (unless you mean it was from an internal
source like your security team?).
Cheers,
James.
___
ci
920s, which seems to relate to the hidden TCL scripts
run in the background when interfaces go up/down, change speed, SFPs
are changed etc.
I'm curious to know if you spoke to TAC and if they related it to the
same source of problems.
Cheers,
James.
__
On Wed, 20 May 2020 at 21:45, james list wrote:
>
> Dear experts
> my customer have some multicast flows which are detected sometime with
> peaks/latency.
>
> They measure this latency based on protocol financial feed timestamp which
> I'm not able to decode (I guess they
Il giorno gio 21 mag 2020 alle ore 06:41 Saku Ytti ha
scritto:
> On Wed, 20 May 2020 at 23:45, james list wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> > Dear experts
> > my customer have some multicast flows which are detected sometime with
> > peaks/latency.
>
> > They report
on Arista switch to check if
the latency is really obtained checking protocol market timestamp ?
Thanks in advance for any hint or help.
Cheers
James
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
ls ldp' and router-id configured below it. As long as you
don't
have LDP adjacencies defined, and there are no LDP tunnels configured, you
won't have
any LDP in use.
P routers are not affected, as they do not need to allocate labels for VPN
services.
On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 10:13, Saku Ytti wrote:
>
> On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 11:33, James Bensley
> wrote:
>
> > APE has a wavelength from provider A to P-1 and a 2nd wavelength from
> > provider B to P-2. I’ve asked each provider for a 2nd wavelength from
> > me
On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 09:58, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
>
> On 30/Apr/20 10:33, James Bensley wrote:
>
> > Role based and metric based IGP costs are a good idea in theory. They
> > are a lot more difficult in practice. Another problem with role based
> > IGP costs
ng location, which isn’t reflected in the BGP
preference.
The key point is this:
OP needs to choose what is actually practical for his network (which
may be role-based costs), not what is academically superior.
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list
them to the rest of your network. It
will hurt you a year from now on that 3AM on-call call-out when you’ve
forgotten why and this 7201 has different costs to all your other
routers and you have to waste time bottoming out why, before looking
into whatever the real issue is.
Cheers,
James.
__
packets with your provider or use some "debug bgp" commands to see
whats really going on.
Also, maybe reconsider if need them to advertise a default route if
you're getting a partial table from them.
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list ci
ex,
Nobody has mentioned it yet so I will; this is going through the IETF
BESS working group right now, I think this is the kind of thing you're
asking about:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dunbar-idr-sdwan-port-safi-06
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp m
out where is the problem and who is experiencing the problem (ie a
tier1 carrier)?
Cheers
James
___
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/
?
We decided to add a link with the same carrier and we are aware we will not
reach 50/50 balancing.
What about RAM memory? Don t you see any issue?
Cheers
Il Dom 8 Mar 2020, 08:48 james list ha scritto:
> Dear all
> I'd like to have your recommandation.
>
> Our customer runs
issue in terms of
performance/memory/whatelse in adding a new EBGP peering ?
Which is the best way to try to load balance in output ?
>From output following I am not sure if going to upgrade the RAM or not...
Thanks in advance for your help!
Cheers
James
ASR1001xxx#sh ver
Cisco IOS XE Softw
On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 at 23:36, James Jun wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 10:59:59PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote:
> >
> > > Have you considered the NCS540?
> >
> > We did. Two major problems as I've shared on this list before:
> >
> >
ill haven't sorted out IOS-XR in this
regard.
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 at 20:55, Mark Tinka wrote:
> I don't think the 8000 is part of the NCS family.
Ah yeah, sorry, my bad!
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
arch
ually replacing ASR 920s with ASR-9901s to bring MPLS
to nearest POPs, and then for smaller sites further downstream that don't
require
MPLS uplinks, we now roll packet boxes from Ciena (CN5142) to handle 1GE access.
James
___
cisco-nsp mailing list c
r-port
buffers. It's been a while since I touched a 7K but I do recall that
the default settings were not great.
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
ost always becomes permanent :-)
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
ith 2-4x 10G uplinks).
I'd be curious to know if you've had any operational issues that you
share with regards to IOS-XR at the access layer, because it's not
clear to me what you mean by "too heavy".
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing
n the number of
packets they shift whilst consuming a whole rack of space and $LOL
amount of power, if you just need edge capacity with minimal features
and buffers it's not efficient.
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
ht
rch "ASR 1000 EFP"
Hope this helps,
James
___
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/
ased on
conversations we've had with our representatives, 8000 isn't replacing ASR9K.
They are for different areas of the network or use cases, much like QFX10k/PE
chip PTX boxes aren't replacing MX series on Juniper land either anytime soon.
James
w cost per bit, scale up, mid-level features on Cisco owned
chip" targeted to compete against QFX10K/new PTX.
ASR9K would remain as run-to-completion high touch platform. In fact, we've
already been informed by our account team that new A99 400GE cards wi
>
> Mark
Hi Mark,
What RADIUS attributes are you returning / have you tried to return
which failed?
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
deploy the box -- last I checked, there is no
option to deploy NCS 540 with a perpetual license. Not a big fan of recurring
subscription schemes for access network elements, so that's another reason
NCS540 will never see the light of day in our setup.
James
_
y to support denser line cards). For new deployment, you'd
really want
9906, but at this point, you're spending deep. Definitely not 9001 pricing
level.
James
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/li
appy to be wrong here, but I though the VASI stuff had been killed off?
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
single WAN link that doesn't support logical
separation such as VLANs, e.g. ADSL [1] to run multiple VRFs over different
VLANs, e.g. internet in global routing table over VLAN 10, management VRF over
VLAN 20 etc? And you basically want multiple VRFs between the CPE and it's
gateway (BNG/LNS/PE) do tha
y
of repeating this issue from an IP address permitted by LTPS?
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
dam
^ This. Never use "ip ospf mtu-ignore" - you'll just mask problems
that will bite you later (like now, possibly).
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
ar
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 12:31:54PM +0100, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
> I'd expect the boot(and install) of GISO from USB to be fairly quick.
>
> adam
I don't know about USB boot but installing GISO on live router (.iso copied
over to RP, then
install update command used) is about 1
Everyone,
I've run into a bit of a problem with policy routing IPv6 addresses where the
match pattern never matches (sample below).
We have 2 active/active links and have been using IPv4 policy routing for
years, we 're now starting to deploy IPv6 on the campus, and have hit an
immediate
On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 at 18:35, Jared Mauch wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 2, 2019, at 3:50 AM, James Bensley
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > I recently upgraded from eXR 6.5.2 to 6.5.3 and pushed the files using
> > SCP to the router from a jump box, which was on
files using
SCP to the router from a jump box, which was on the same LAN as the
management interface on the RSP. It was copying at 100Mbps (the speed
of the OOB switch) so I think in eXR these issues are more or less
fixed.
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
tps://null.53bits.co.uk/index.php?page=6500-7600-tcam-fib-allocation
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
then be contained only to compute nodes.
DoD label allocations and longest-prefix matching for FECs means that
summarization can be used in the a Seamless MPLS architecture:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5283
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7032
Cheers,
James.
___
RTT on this link is 10ms:
How do you know this to be 100% correct - have you OTDR/iOLM tested this link?
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
nt but they're very much in draft format, I can
try and make them presentable if I get some free time / and there is
demand.
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
LDP domain to a
> new BGP domain, forget about interop.
Can’t really comment on this as it’s quite specific to your setup and
requirements, I don’t fully understand the statement.
Cheers,
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
ere is only parsing layer 2 headers on ingress to source
entropy...
On Fri, 15 Mar 2019 at 19:52, James Jun wrote:
...
> But the feature problem here is that anytime EtherType is not IP, entropy
> isn't
> generated for FAT-PW as it won't see the payload IP headers after ENET? If
&g
he Extended IS Reachability with 24 bit metric field. So
route leaking and extended metrics can be confusing to troubleshoot.
The command I think you're looking for on IOS:
redistribute isis ip { level-1 | level-2 } into { level-2 | level-1 }
[ [ distribute-list list-number ] | [ route-map map-tag ] ]
Use at your own peril.
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
a certain
feature however, this always required a reboot to implement.
Cheers,
James.
___
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/
Hi James
On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 09:29:13AM +, James Bensley wrote:
> The ingress PE probably only has the same source and destination MACs
> to hash on to generate the FAT label. This means that in the scenario
> that your customer is using MPLS the required level of entr
On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 18:19, James Jun wrote:
>
> Hey all,
>
> I have a PW scenario that looks like this:
>
> Customer --- PE1 P [4x10GE LAG] PE2 -- Customer
>
> PE1, P and PE2 routers are all ASR9K.
>
> EoMPLS PW is delivered to customer; bot
1 - 100 of 884 matches
Mail list logo
