Is there a supported cisco method to provide gateway redundancy (hsrp,
vrrp) without having to use three ip addresses from the same subnet? slb?
Thanks,
Joe
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Anyone know how to decipher a 'show proc mem' on an ASA (ver 7.2.3)?
Seeing a memory loss of about 2MB per day on our 5520.I assumed that
for a given process, 'Allocated' minus 'Freed' would give you how much
it's still holding, but for some processes, this results in a negative
number, and
Latest 12.2(18)SXF(number) version on CCO.
Are you going the 65xx route or the 76xx route moving forward?
They split after SXF release.
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 10:46:50AM -0300, Juliano Luz - Sicredi wrote:
We are currently in the process of selecting an IOS image for a new 6509
with SUP7203B
Philippe,
I need to check back with the BU on it. I thought they were putting
a document out on this G2 processing reporting issue.
Basically due to the way the G2 does CPU accounting it looks
like it's higher at lower loads based on the CPU measurements.
If you put it in the lab and measure
Joe,
One option is to use VRRP. In VRRP the virtual IP is the actual IP used
on the physical interface of the primary router, so you will still have
to assign an IP address for each router (but this would be the case in
any solution anyway), but no need for a 3rd IP for the virtual.
For VRRP,
Tassos,
DFC-3CXL is used with RSP720, while DFC-3BXL is used with SUP720.
The DFC has to be matched with the RSP/SUP module, as it is basically a
replica of the PFC.
Arie
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tassos
Chatzithomaoglou
Sent:
I'm looking for a document describing the differences between these 2 DFC
modules.
Looking through various CCO pages, the only difference i found was the number
of mac addresses supported (64k vs 96k).
Is there anything else i'm missing?
Also, has anyone used DFC-3CXL with 67xx modules on a
Hi Arie,
Can you please explain the has to be matched part?
I have both 6500/SUP720 and 7600/RSP720 systems and i would prefer to get
DFC-3CXL cards (instead of DFC-3BXL), so i can use them
at their maximum efficiency in both systems (interchangeably). Isn't that
possible?
Regards,
Tassos
Tassos,
Basically, if you have a Sup720-3B, it means you have a PFC3B.
If you have a module with DFC-3BXL then you will gain nothing, as the DFC has
to match with the PFC model, so basically even though you have DFC-3BXL, it
would operate in 3B mode.
The same works the other way. If you have
I think i haven't made it clear enough
Let's suppose i have the following 2 systems:
6500/SUP720-3BXL
6724-SFP (DFC-3CXL)
6500/SUP720-3BXL
6724-SFP (DFC-3BXL)
If i'm not mistaken both will operate in 3BXL mode, so what is the disadvantage
of the first one?
Now, suppose i also have the
Hi,
A customer of ours has two sites, one with an 1800 the other with a 2800.
There's a point-to-point T1 connecting the locations. The two locations also
have a backup link through my network via DSL.
The customer wants to establish a VPN between the two locations over the ptp
T1, and a
Should be fine. Both models have built-in VPN accelerators, should
haven't a couple megabit without skipping a beat.
Chuck Church
Principal Network Engineer, CCIE #8776
Harris Information Technology Services
EDS Contractor - Navy Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI)
1210 N. Parker Rd. | Greenville, SC
1800/2800 should have no problem handling T1 VPN. Use AIM-SSL1/SSL2
encryption cards for them. Tag on Zone-base FW and IOS IPS and your
customer should feel safe :)
-lmn
On Feb 20, 2008 11:48 AM, Adam Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
A customer of ours has two sites, one with an 1800
Unless i'm reading something wrong, both have $15000 as a GPL price.
--
Tassos
Dirk-Jan van Helmond wrote on 20/2/2008 7:30 μμ:
The 3CXL will work with a Sup720/3BXL, but will (ofcourse) operate in 3BXL
mode. no disadvantage (except financially).
The 3CXL has some more features than the
You are right, it should be there but it isn't.
El mié, 20-02-2008 a las 08:39 -0500, Christian Koch escribió:
should be here
http://cisco.com/en/US/prod/assets/visio/product_visio_icon0900aecd80094d04.zip
On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 6:08 AM, Ultramajestic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does anyone know what the capabilities of the on-board 10G interfaces?
Do they compare more with the LAN 10G ports like what are found on the
6704/8 linecards or do they compare better with the 10G WAN interfaces
found on the ES20 or SPAs? I'm wondering if the on-board 10G interfaces
would
I need to run vlan bridging on a 6500 sup2 for 3 weeks. I'm following
the documentation here:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk389/tk621/technologies_tech_note09186a00800a7af6.shtml#sample2
show bridge tells me, among other things, Total of 300 station
blocks, 298 free (just doing a test vlan
Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote:
I think i haven't made it clear enough
Let's suppose i have the following 2 systems:
6500/SUP720-3BXL
6724-SFP (DFC-3CXL)
6500/SUP720-3BXL
6724-SFP (DFC-3BXL)
If i'm not mistaken both will operate in 3BXL mode, so what is the
disadvantage of the
You might want to look at optimized edge routing (OER).
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6628/products_ios_protocol_option_home.html
--
Colin McNamara
(858)208-8105
CCIE #18233,RHCE,GCIH
http://www.colinmcnamara.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/colinmcnamara
The difficult we do
On (2008-02-20 16:01 -0600), Justin Shore wrote:
Does anyone know what the capabilities of the on-board 10G interfaces?
Do they compare more with the LAN 10G ports like what are found on the
6704/8 linecards or do they compare better with the 10G WAN interfaces
found on the ES20 or SPAs?
20 matches
Mail list logo
