On 5/3/19 5:14 AM, Martin T wrote:
> Hi Octavio,
>
> instead of a two-card laptop I used the available ports in server
> named "svr", but in principle I built the setup you described:
>
> CISCO1921[Gi0/0] <-> [eno1]test-br[eno2] <-> [eno3]svr
I intended to have an independent measurement tool
On 5/2/19 10:11 AM, Martin T wrote:
>>> Gi0/0 in Cisco 1921 ISR has 10.66.66.2/24 configured and eno3 in Linux
>>> server has 10.66.66.1/24 configured. RTT on this link is 10ms:
>>
>> How do you know this to be 100% correct - have you OTDR/iOLM tested this
>> link?
>>
> I can't OTDR it because
On 12/28/2017 04:10 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 08:54:03PM +, Nick Cutting wrote:
>> I would also like to know the answer to this.
>>
>> I always get scared and buy 16 gig if I'm taking in the full routing table.
>> (4431/4451/4351 so far)
>>
>> I'm sure I
Hello.
We are noticing our ASR 1002 is propagating BGP-learned routes to its
neighbors after the path is chosen but before the route gets installed
in the FIB.
With the increasing size of the BGP table, this is causing race
conditions that turn into traffic loops during convergence. The router
On 05/10/2016 05:24 PM, CiscoNSP List wrote:
>
> Thanks Nathan - The device has 8 ports as per the doc here:
>
> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/routers/access/4400/hardware/installation/guide4400-4300/C4400_isr/Overview.html#32890
It's 4 dual-port interfaces, not 8 interfaces. You can use
On 07/04/15 09:46, Matthew Crocker wrote:
Can anyone confirm the Cisco Catalyst 2960X-48LPS-L supports dual monitor
sessions (SPAN)? I need to monitor 4 ports (Tx Rx) to two different
recording devices
i.e. two monitor sessions, same 4 source ports, 2 different destination
ports.
On 01/04/15 08:05, Michael Malitsky wrote:
I need to change the public IP of my VPN headend, which will
necessitate corresponding Peer IP changes on all N remote peers. We
already have the new IP space, currently configured as a secondary
address. Problem is that N-1 of the peers are
On 11/29/2014 10:40 PM, Xuhu NSP wrote:
Hi folks, just want to check that if we just purchase few new
transceivers from Cisco, how are you going to purchase the
maintenance service, because I didn't see the list price only for
transceivers, normally purchase with line cards or chassis.
It's
On 18/11/14 02:16, M K wrote:
Is it true that this interface can handle 100Mbps send and 100Mbps receive at
the same time?
Yes. It's 100 Mbps full-duplex.
like it is 200Mbps ?
No. It's 100 Mbps full-duplex.
It's the same as DSL: If you have a 10 Mbps download speed and a 1 Mbps
upload
On 11/22/2014 11:43 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 02:16:23 AM Octavio Alvarez
wrote:
If I found a vendor that did that, I would run away from
it for lying.
But they all do that.
What is more confusing is when vendors use half-duplex
bandwidth to make a line card seem
On 11/22/2014 12:17 PM, Octavio Alvarez wrote:
On 11/22/2014 11:43 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
On Saturday, November 22, 2014 02:16:23 AM Octavio Alvarez
wrote:
If I found a vendor that did that, I would run away from
it for lying.
But they all do that.
What is more confusing is when vendors use
On 02/03/2014 06:09 AM, Rolf Hanßen wrote:
But it started to drop packets, I saw no pattern, it looked nearly random.
I needed to reboot both boxes to resolve that issue.
That pretty much sums it up.
You can set up some inbound filtering to prevent a lot of routes to go
into the routing table
On 02/01/2014 08:28 PM, Joseph Hardeman wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I have a SUP2t engine running IOS s2t54-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M version and I am
wondering if there is a way to filter or block TCP or UDP port traffic.
I know how to NULL route IP 's but I don't know if there is a way to block
or deny
On 02/01/2014 08:27 AM, Adam Greene wrote:
Every so often (it started three months ago, about once per month, now it's
about once per week, but it's not regular), we're getting very high latency
on pings from our Internal Network to the ASA5520, and the OSPF adjacency
between the 3750 and the
On 02/01/2014 09:46 AM, Jeff Kell wrote:
Could we petition for an HTML 1.0, old-school, no-javascript, no Java
apps, alternative TAC site?
Add an explicit no JavaScript to the mix and I sign. :)
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
On 11/10/2013 11:11 AM, Youssef Bengelloun-Zahr wrote:
- TCP traffic reaches up to 90 Mbits/s for one way streams (both
ways),
- TCP traffic hits some kind of limit and isn't able to achieve more
than 40-60 Mbits/s in average === That's the problem we are facing
If you are
???
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:39 AM, Octavio Alvarez
alvar...@alvarezp.ods.org mailto:alvar...@alvarezp.ods.org wrote:
It could be anywhere.
I remember seeing buggy devices that didn't dynamically adapt to
intermediate TCP MSS modifications. We had to analyze the TCP headers
It could be anywhere.
I remember seeing buggy devices that didn't dynamically adapt to
intermediate TCP MSS modifications. We had to analyze the TCP headers on
the streams to find this out. It was a reflected symptom.
I've also seen it on DSL links that didn't had ip tcp adjust-mss 1452
in
The annoyance could be avoided by removing Java requirements from the
website.
On 11/02/2013 08:20 PM, Alex Presse wrote:
It's the new java update - unsigned code gets user verification windows.
Cisco (and everybody else) will need to update all their java delivered user
interfaces to avoid
using?
El 08/10/13 09:53, Octavio Alvarez escribió:
Wait a minute... My router supports reload reason already and rejects
reload int 10.
Check later IOS versions.
On 10/07/2013 12:05 PM, Pete Lumbis wrote:
The two outputs do have different warnings:
reload reason
]
===
===
Router#reload in 5
Reload scheduled in 5 minutes by console
Reload reason: Reload Command
Proceed with reload? [confirm]
===
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Octavio Alvarez
alvar...@alvarezp.ods.org
On 10/07/2013 05:30 AM, Pete Lumbis wrote:
If we fix the behavior what does the fix look like? Do we not allow any
reason that starts with i(in) c (cancel) or a(at)? But then what if
you want a reload reason of reload installing new software? Should this
be blocked?
Create reload reason
On Sun, 22 Aug 2010 02:29:28 -0700, Sridhar Ayengar ploops...@gmail.com
wrote:
I have a Verizon FiOS connection with 5 IP addresses attached to my 7505.
So because it's excluded from the access-list, traffic from my private
network 172.16.16.0 to my public IP addresses is not NATed. I
On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 19:03:44 -0700, Jeferson Guardia jefers...@gmail.com
wrote:
Guys,
Anyone knows how to solve this on dynamips? (router with lan switch
connection) - I thought that setting
speed auto would solve it.
R3#
*Mar 1 00:12:08.323: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by
On Fri, 28 May 2010 16:41:16 -0700, Rick Kunkel kun...@w-link.net wrote:
I've connected a switch of mine to a provider's switch, and I'm getting
CDP-4-NATIVE_VLAN_MISMATCH warnings... but everything works fine.
Is this just a harmless warning? I'm not doing any VLANs with them.
Their
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 06:35:37 -0700, Luan Nguyen l...@netcraftsmen.net
wrote:
In this case, a dual hub (loadshare/backup) for 1000+ spokes would be
just fine.
Single-hub, dual-cloud scales and performs and converges better
than dual-hub, single-cloud and are not even recommended by Cisco.
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 23:47:47 -0700, Cord MacLeod cordmacl...@gmail.com
wrote:
3 days ago traffic started showing up on the trunk port connecting my
top of rack switches. Each of these switches has it's own better trunk
path to the root bridge. I can't see why any traffic at all would
27 matches
Mail list logo
