[c-nsp] ME3600X 24CX experience feedback

2014-02-10 Thread George Giannousopoulos
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] wisdom of switchport block ...

2014-02-10 Thread Lukas Tribus
Hi, Hello, I am looking at tightening up my subscriber access network and, if I understand the documentation correctly, 'switchport block unicast' will prevent a cisco switch (3560g in this case) from flooding unicast frames out any port so configured, unless the destination mac address

Re: [c-nsp] Sup2T netflow problems

2014-02-10 Thread Peter Rathlev
On Fri, 2014-02-07 at 16:02 +0100, Chris Welti wrote: Unfortunately this bug is present in *all* Sup2T firmware releases so far. I've seen it in 12.2, 15.0 and 15.1 images. Downgrading to 15.0(1)SY5 would probably be okay for us. The few 15.1SY specific features we've started using are not

[c-nsp] Offering bgp services from the L3 access edge with relatively low-spec devices using bgp selective route download ?

2014-02-10 Thread Spyros Kakaroukas
Hey all, Lately I’ve been pondering the idea of offering full bgp feed to customers from our L3 access edge ( consisting mostly of ME3600Xs ) using bgp selective route download ( http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios-xml/ios/iproute_bgp/configuration/15-s/irg-selective-download.html ) , instead

Re: [c-nsp] wisdom of switchport block ...

2014-02-10 Thread Tarko Tikan
hey, I am looking at tightening up my subscriber access network and, if I understand the documentation correctly, 'switchport block unicast' will prevent a cisco switch (3560g in this case) from flooding unicast frames out any port so configured, unless the destination mac address was

Re: [c-nsp] wisdom of switchport block ...

2014-02-10 Thread András Tóth
Hi, Let's not forget STP topology change notifications (TCNs) because they'll cause the MAC address entries to age out in forward-delay (15 sec) or even immediately with Rapid-STP. A STP topology change is observed (and TCN generated) when a non-edge (non-portfast) port goes either from

Re: [c-nsp] Offering bgp services from the L3 access edge with relatively low-spec devices using bgp selective route download ?

2014-02-10 Thread Mark Tinka
On Monday, February 10, 2014 09:01:35 PM Spyros Kakaroukas wrote: It’s going to take a bit more labbing before we decide whether we want to actually implement this or not, but it seemed like an interesting idea so I thought I’d share. Feedback would be appreciated! I recommend this

Re: [c-nsp] wisdom of switchport block ...

2014-02-10 Thread Tarko Tikan
hey, Let's not forget STP topology change notifications (TCNs) because they'll cause the MAC address entries to age out in forward-delay (15 sec) or even immediately with Rapid-STP. TCN will also screw up IGMP snooping and will cause multicast flooding for N * general-query-timeout. As a