On Fri Dec 07, 2018 at 03:40:45PM +, Harry Hambi - Atos wrote:
> Trying to upgrade a 3750G from IOS c3750e-universalk9-mz.150-2.SE10.bin to
> a latest version c3750e-universalk9-mz.152-4.E7.bin, and I am getting the
> following error:
> Error loading "flash:
David,
On Wed Aug 23, 2017 at 08:19:11AM +, David Hubbard wrote:
> The pricing & licensing almost killed the deal before I executed it.
It's the licensing that I'm most worried about - particularly as it doesn't
appear to be public documented.
> but on
> the 5501se, the base price only
All,
I'm currently trying to plan some upgrades for one of my networks where we
currently use Cat6500/Sup2T as both 'core' and 'border' routers, but are very
rapidly outgrowing them. I've recently split off the L2 transport aspects from
the 6500's onto 100G capable switches (I ended up using
On Fri Mar 03, 2017 at 09:04:28AM -0800, Peter Kranz wrote:
> On a WS-X6908-10G DCEF2T line card with SUP2T's, I ran into overruns
> yesterday on a 4x10G etherchannel that I am at a loss to resolve:
Are you seeing any fabric drops? "show fabric drop"
We're just troubleshooting a similar(ish)
On Tue Jan 24, 2017 at 09:02:18AM +0100, Gert Doering wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 07:33:08PM -0500, Charles Sprickman via cisco-nsp
> wrote:
> > I have to say, I haven???t been impressed with their support in a long
> > time. We have smartnet really just for hardware, and recently I figured
On Sun Jan 08, 2017 at 11:46:59AM -0500, Curtis Piehler wrote:
> I would like to replace one of the DIA providers with
> another by shutting it down then enabling the new DIA provider. If I do
> this process will the device reclaim the unused memory once the old DIA
> provider is shut down, then
On Fri Dec 02, 2016 at 03:40:03PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote:
> Good to know.
>
> We are currently considering the 9508 for a particular role (Layer 2
> only), and I know they are based on the Broadcom chip. I'm guessing this
> is where the limitation is coming from, yes?
The 92160 is based on
On Fri Dec 02, 2016 at 01:15:01PM +, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> so just to confirm, what you're saying is that if the N9k switch is in
> standard L2 mode, no L3 or mpls configured, that it cannot forward VPLS
> frames with MAC addresses starting with either 4 or 6?
Where the inner Destination MAC
On Fri Dec 02, 2016 at 03:16:17PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote:
> Remind me - are you running the Nexus 9000 as a PE router, or as a basic
> Layer 2 Ethernet switch?
Basic Layer 2 Ethernet switch, sat between two of my MPLS P routers.
The Nexus 9000 does not support MPLS.
Simon
On Wed Nov 23, 2016 at 12:01:20PM +, Simon Lockhart wrote:
> On Fri Nov 04, 2016 at 03:40:05PM +0000, Simon Lockhart wrote:
> > To me, everything *looks* right, it's just that some VPLS traffic traversing
> > the new link gets lost.
>
> For those who are interested...
>
On Wed Nov 23, 2016 at 12:07:26PM +, James Bensley wrote:
> Yep. This is why I always use the control word. Turn it on and your
> problem will probably go away.
If only. Extreme EXOS doesn't support control word :(
(Or, at least, I've not found the right knob to turn yet)
Simon
On Fri Nov 04, 2016 at 03:40:05PM +, Simon Lockhart wrote:
> To me, everything *looks* right, it's just that some VPLS traffic traversing
> the new link gets lost.
For those who are interested...
Well, I finally got to the bottom of this, and have pushed it to Cisco TAC
for
On Fri Nov 04, 2016 at 03:40:05PM +, Simon Lockhart wrote:
> Anyone got any suggestions on what I should look for whilst troubleshooting
> this?
Well, having got myself to a point where I could reliably reproduce the
problem, I think I've narrowed down the issue...
On the 100G on the
All,
Having banged my head against a brick wall all day today trying to work out
what's going on, and not having got anywhere, I thought I'd ask this list for
some suggestions...
I've got a Cisco MPLS core network, with Extreme boxes running as VPLS
endpoints. Over the last couple of days I've
On Mon Jul 18, 2016 at 08:24:55PM -0300, Estagiario wrote:
> used Cisco 6505+SUP720-3BXL+WS-X6704-10GE = (R $ 40,000)
To give you a feel, in the UK I would expect to pay about 20% of that price,
maybe even 10%, or less. I don't know what the used market is like in Brazil,
but you may do better to
On Wed May 04, 2016 at 02:27:13PM +0100, Phil Mayers wrote:
> Right up until you RMA it and the *next* TAC engineer says it's a fake and
> you can't have a replacement, and the previous engineer is nowhere to be
> found.
My thoughts exactly.
Just to confuse matters a bit, we don't buy these
All,
We've recently received a WS-X6908-10G-2T which has been 'upgraded' to a -2TXL
by replacing the DFC-4 with a DFC4-EXL.
When we install the card in our 6500, we get the following warning:
May 3 05:49:10.566 UTC: %SMC-DFC4-2-BAD_ID_HW: Failed Identification Test in
4/0/1 [5/0]
The
On Wed Jan 13, 2016 at 07:10:09AM -0800, Azher Mughal wrote:
> For WS 6704 (with DFC3B), I was able to go close to 9Gbps per port
> across the bus when using Iperf and jumbo frames. Single port on each of
> the bus gives you line rate of 9.9Gbps.
Sounds like you come from the Cisco camp of
On Wed Jan 13, 2016 at 04:25:48PM +0200, Chris Knipe wrote:
> Whilst I can understand over subscription (and subsequent drops) on the
> WS-X6708, would the same hold true for the WS-X7604?
The WS-X6704 has woefully underpowered ASICs on it. It has the dual 20G bus
connections, with two 10G ports
that I get the correct kit from the start.
These toys aren't cheap :-(
Wait until you want 40G or 100G - then you'll realise that 10G stuff is
cheap :)
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Server Co-location * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director| * Domain Web Hosting * Connectivity
On Sat Jan 17, 2015 at 11:57:21AM +0200, Chris Knipe wrote:
Depends on your total traffic requirements. SUP720 + 6704 + 6748-GE-TX
(+ 6724-SFP if I need fibre) is still my work-horse of choice for a Cisco
switch offering both 10G and 1G ports. On the used market, these blades are
available
of potential (880G per slot), but it's not supported by
either
Supervisors or Linecards that are available today (current limit is
80G/slot).
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Server Co-location * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director| * Domain
On Thu Nov 27, 2014 at 10:18:41AM +, R LAS wrote:
Discussing a new architecture of DCI (Data Center Interconnection), Cisco
raccomends both ASR9k and 6807. The architecture requested by the customer
forecast MPLS/VPLS supported by DCI.
From pricing point of view there is a quite big
All,
(This is vaguely related to my question earlier in the week about ASR capacity)
We use quite a few 6704-10GE blades on our network, and I'm seeing some
random congestion type issues. In some cases, I've made the problem go away
by shuffling ports between blades to spread the load, but I'm
, Simon Lockhart si...@slimey.org wrote:
All,
I'm banging my head against a brick wall trying to get sensible answers
from
Cisco TAC, so thought I'd ask the educated masses who may have come across
this before...
I've got a Cisco ASR1004 with RP2, ESP40, 2 * SIP40's, and 8 * 10GE ports
All,
I'm banging my head against a brick wall trying to get sensible answers from
Cisco TAC, so thought I'd ask the educated masses who may have come across
this before...
I've got a Cisco ASR1004 with RP2, ESP40, 2 * SIP40's, and 8 * 10GE ports.
A snapshot of usage on these ports at peak is:
On Sun Mar 16, 2014 at 08:17:07PM -0400, Pete Lumbis wrote:
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/routers/asr-1000-series-aggregation-services-routers/110531-asr-packet-drop.htm
Thanks - I've looked at that page a few times, but it seems to focus on how to
find out what's gone wrong when
All,
I have a number of ASR1004's on my network, each with an identical
configuration, consisting of:
ASR1000-RP2
ASR1000-ESP40
2 * ASR1000-SIP40
4 * SPA-1X10GE-L-V2 (Te0/0/0, Te0/1/0, Te1/0/0, Te1/1/0)
Two of the 10G ports are customer facing, the other two are core facing. All
the 10G ports
On Fri Jun 07, 2013 at 06:56:31AM -0500, Bradley Williamson wrote:
What version of code are you running. There is a bug in DHCP after 4.1. I
have been working with Cisco on this and they finally acknowledged it is a
bug. We have no date for a patch yet.
I'm running 4.3.1 on ASR9001. What's
All,
I'm currently evaluating the ASR9001 as a BNG for IPoE traffic (Double VLAN
tagged traffic, doing DHCP) - but I'm having difficulties getting the DHCP
proxy bit working. Has anyone done this before, or can anyone help point me
in the direction of why my config isn't working?
I've been
On Wed May 29, 2013 at 04:36:12PM +0100, Tom Storey wrote:
Is there a reason you couldnt do something like the following?
encapsulation dot1q 100 second-dot1q 1-4095
Maybe not as elegant as the any keyword, but it would let you do
routing while covering all of the inner VLAN IDs?
All,
I'm working on a project which uses GPON to connect tens of thousands of
properties in a fibre-to-the-home environment. Each property will be handed
off to me as a double-tagged vlan, one per property. Obviously I don't want
to manually create tens of thousands of subinterfaces on a router,
On Wed Apr 17, 2013 at 12:57:05PM -0700, Bruce Pinsky wrote:
Simon Lockhart wrote:
What I'd come up with is that I'd ignore the inner tags, and just
use the outer S-Tag to put the properties into subnets (one per
S-Tag), and then just do DHCP. However, I'm not quite sure how I'd
achieve
On Sun Mar 24, 2013 at 02:06:09PM +0300, Samir Abidali wrote:
Can you somebody help me in understanding whey GRE tunnel Cisco
WS-SUP720-3BXL , with two GRE tunnel configured will spike the cpur to 99%
when the traffic goes beyond 30mbps.
According to documentation, the GRE is hardware
All,
Is anyone running 15.1(1)SY (or an earlier 15.x release) on a 6500/Sup720? I
tried to upgrade a box this morning from 12.2(33)SXJ3 to 15.1(1)SY, and all
worked okay except one line card (a WS-X6748-SFP):
router#show mod 2
Mod Ports Card Type Model
On Sat Mar 23, 2013 at 04:29:10AM -0700, Erik Nelson wrote:
I have a 6509-E with SUP720-10G running 15.1(1)SY with a 6748-SFP/DFC3A. The
chassis also has two 6748-GE-TX one with DFC3B and one with DFC3CXL. The
6748-SFP is HW 1.3.
Many thanks for the confirmation that it can work. Looks like
All,
I'm running an ASR1004 as a centralised CGNAT router. I've got various pools
defined for different customers, and use a NAT route-map to stop private IPs
being NAT'd when trying to reach our internal services (where we'd want to see
the private IPs still). Typical config per customer is:
ip
Pete,
Many thanks for taking the time to respond.
On Fri Mar 22, 2013 at 06:26:14PM +0100, Pete Lumbis wrote:
My guess is the NAT configuration is actually exceeding TCAM on the ESP
that is installed. You can take a look at show platform hardware qfp
active tcam resource-manager to see the
All,
I'm currently using SUP720-3BXL's in my BGP border devices. Obviously the
SUP720 is not a particularly fast CPU, so it is pretty slow at bringing up a
lot of BGP sessions.
On one particular box, I've got 250 BGP neighbours - 1 full table transit, 2
IGP to route-reflectors, and the rest are
On Fri Dec 07, 2012 at 09:54:08AM -0500, Randy wrote:
Have you considered a CoPP policy to limit the rate of BGP convergence?
Not sure if it would help with so many peers but it might lessen the
pain on your 3 full tables.
No - I'm not doing any CoPP at the moment - but probably should.
Are
Cisco-NSP'ers,
Due to a requirement to deploy CGN, I'm looking at the Cisco ASR1k range for
the first time, and I'm a little confused about the different variants of
RP, ESP, SIP, etc - and I'm hoping someone can clarify things a bit.
I'm looking for a box which can route 10GE to 10GE at
/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
___
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/
--
Simon Lockhart | * Server Co-location * ADSL * Domain Registration
On Fri Feb 10, 2012 at 01:31:12PM -0800, Sachin Gupta (sagupta) wrote:
Full IPv6 support at FCS. What I mean by full is feature parity with
Supervisor Engine 7-E on Catalyst 4500 platform.
[SNIP]
Sachin,
Can I just publicly thank you (and the other Cisco employees who post to
cisco-nsp) for
On Tue Mar 29, 2011 at 10:35:41AM -0700, Waris Sagheer (waris) wrote:
VPLS and H-VPLS will be supported in the next release coming out in June
2011.
On the ME3600X as well, or just the ME3800X?
Simon
___
cisco-nsp mailing list
On Mon Mar 28, 2011 at 02:22:55PM -0700, Seth Mattinen wrote:
The only thing any of us can really do about that is decline to buy it.
Otherwise there is no perceivable effect in sales to its lack of IPv6
support, and no driving force to get it there.
Depends what you want to use it for. I've
On Fri Jan 21, 2011 at 11:51:26PM +0100, Tth Andrs wrote:
Did you enable the extended routing SDM template on the 3550 switch?
Note that while on the 3560 it's only called routing, the 3550 has an
extended routing version, which has to be enabled for VRF to work.
Yes - I did that (as the
All,
I've got a requirement for one of our customers to run two seperate networks
over the same ethernet based WAN. The WAN is provided by the carrier as single
VLAN per site, dot1q tagged at each end (both the customer site and our central
PoP). The customer sites are all live currently with a
All,
I've got a bunch of Cisco 3560-xxTS's deployed as edge switches. Of the most
recent batch, I've got just one switch which is showing odd behaviour, and
I'm wondering if anyone has seen this before.
The switch is running c3560-ipbasek9-mz.122-53.SE2
I'm monitoring the switch with rancid,
On Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 05:40:56PM +0100, Peter Rathlev wrote:
SNMPv2-SMI::mib-2.17.4.3.1.1.164.186.219.22.153.81 = Hex-STRING: A4 BA DB
16 99 51
This MAC address is strange though. :-)
Plenty of strange MAC addresses around these days...
From
to that question?
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director|* Domain Web Hosting * Internet Consultancy *
Bogons Ltd | * http://www.bogons.net/ * Email: i...@bogons.net *
___
cisco-nsp
On Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 01:35:29PM +0100, Peter Rathlev wrote:
What can one do to take an E1 circuit from coax?
Put it through an RJ45 to Coax balun? The difference between RJ45 and
Coax is purely electrical, and baluns to convert are easily available
and at low cost.
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart
SERVICES
c870-advipservicesk9-mz.150-1.M.bin
Release Date: 01/Oct/2009
Size: 23554.10 KB (24119396 bytes)
Minimum Memory: DRAM:192 MB Flash:36 MB
My 877 is fairly new (couple of months old), and only has 128M of RAM and 24M
of flash. Gah, bloat.
Simon
--
Simon
is that EoMPLS has more hardware support than L2TPv3.
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director|* Domain Web Hosting * Internet Consultancy *
Bogons Ltd | * http://www.bogons.net/ * Email: i...@bogons.net
, and they have
approved bother the HWIC-1ADSL-M and the C877-M for their service. I'm using
a C877-M right now.
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director|* Domain Web Hosting * Internet Consultancy *
Bogons Ltd | * http
with Level3 and NTT/Verio for a while now, and neither
charged any extra for the privilege.
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director|* Domain Web Hosting * Internet Consultancy *
Bogons Ltd | * http://www.bogons.net/ * Email: i
and had used
\ as a directory seperator.
Next time I tried downloading an image, I wasn't presented with the download
manager, and everything worked smoothly.
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director|* Domain Web Hosting * Internet
On Mon Apr 27, 2009 at 02:08:59PM -0700, Charles Wyble wrote:
http://www.thtech.net/article/10 for ISC example
That appears to be the canonical example that's trotted out everytime
Option 82 is mentioned. Fine if all you want to do is log the Option 82
information, but less than useful if you
On Mon Feb 09, 2009 at 10:27:25AM -0700, Clinton Work wrote:
a) Set both POS interfaces to clock source internal because there is
no network clock in a back to back configuration.
Surely if you're connecting back to back you want clock source internal on
one end, and clock source network on
. The announcement says that there aren't any replacement
options for the code either. WTF? Did I miss something? Is Cisco
taking away the L3 features from these switches?
I heard that Cisco was planning to roll IPv6 into IP Services. Did AdvIP
give you anything more than IPv6?
Simon
--
Simon
can try to speculate on how to solve such a problem, you'll
need to provide more information, such as what the access network technology
is, what Cisco hardware you have at the ISP end.
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director|* Domain
catch *every* change, as it's a polling based
system, but I've never had a problem with it.
If you want to capture every change that's made, consider TACACS - you'll
probably want that anyway for individual logins to routers...
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain
On Wed May 14, 2008 at 01:56:20PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Who can tell me whether the Twingig CVR-X2-SFP are supported in 6500 module
WS-X6708-10G-3C ?
No - they depend on an additional connector at the back of the slot which is
only in the 3750E etc boxes.
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart
X2 and SFP
connectors at the back of the slot in the switch, then I'm not surprised
that they don't work in the 6708 module. We use them successfully in 3750E's.
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director|* Domain Web Hosting * Internet
2620 (non XM).
I didn't find it.
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director|* Domain Web Hosting * Internet Consultancy *
Bogons Ltd | * http://www.bogons.net/ * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED
is that I've got a whole load of 3550's providing customer-edge
for colo'd servers, and customers are starting to ask for IPv6. Given the
volume of IPv6 traffic I'll see in the short term, I'm happy enough with
process switched.
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain
by lab-sw, and replies being sent by the upstream switch (a 3560), but
the 3550 never learns any neighbours, and pings don't work...
lab-sw.rbsov#show ipv6 nei
lab-sw.rbsov#
Have I missed something needed to make this work, or is it just a work in
progress, released prematurely?
Simon
--
Simon
On Wed Jan 16, 2008 at 11:22:00AM -0500, Sridhar Ayengar wrote:
Right now, I need to find out what a 73-2570-01 is.
Did you try google? Looks like it's a PA-FE-TX
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director|* Domain Web Hosting
On Fri Jan 04, 2008 at 03:38:14PM +0800, Dracul wrote:
I am trying to integrate an AMINO STB (used for iptv) to a cisco
dot1.qtrunk. any thoughts on this?
I'm not aware that the Amino STB supports dot1q.
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration
On Wed Nov 07, 2007 at 09:56:32AM +0100, Kike wrote:
In the sh ip int output both routers have 1500 in the MTU...
So they'll use 1500 for IP packets - but you also need to allow for MPLS tags.
Your interfaces are set in 9216 with the command mtu 9216 or ip mtu 9216?
mtu 9216
Simon
On Wed Nov 07, 2007 at 09:38:19AM +0100, Kike wrote:
Well... I'm a little lost with the MTU concept here... because I
configured two different MTUs, but I don't understand which exactly is
the function of the following commands:
tag-switching mtu 1508 -- P Router
mtu 1508 -- PE
this be
the problem?
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director|* Domain Web Hosting * Internet Consultancy *
Bogons Ltd | * http://www.bogons.net/ * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
___
cisco
,
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director|* Domain Web Hosting * Internet Consultancy *
Bogons Ltd | * http://www.bogons.net/ * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco
the vlans into that to do the routing
between them, and to the outside world.
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration *
Director|* Domain Web Hosting * Internet Consultancy *
Bogons Ltd | * http://www.bogons.net/ * Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Tue May 22, 2007 at 04:15:00PM +0200, Vincent De Keyzer wrote:
I can't find the pinout of the DB-15 connector on the NM-2CE1B.
I'm fairly certain it's this one...
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/access/acs_serv/as5400/hw_inst/mig/54crdcbl.pdf
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun
(in some versions?) but only at low performance and with
high CPU utilization... And, again, it's not supported.
Yeah - I've since found that on the Cisco website.
But, what about GRE performance on true routers?
Simon
--
Simon Lockhart | * Sun Server Colocation * ADSL * Domain Registration
75 matches
Mail list logo
