[c-nsp] Redistribution BGP/OSPF best practice

On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 7:52 PM, Nathan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For now I'll change OSPF costs so nothing goes through there (not trivial unfortunately since it's a very central link) and program a reboot of B. Rebooting B fixed the problem, the problem being that A and B did not peer LDP.

[c-nsp] Weird error

Hi, One of our border routers (7200 VXR NPE-G1) went down and when we connected console and restart it it gave this weird error: %SYS-1-MTNOTFENCED: Expired timer is not fenced, timer = 0, type 0 *** System received a Software forced crash *** Signal= 0x17, code= 0x24, context= 0x63059804 PC =

Re: [c-nsp] experience with nat sip in 12.4(9)T and later

I guess you will like to take a look at the ip nat piggyback-support command This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals

Re: [c-nsp] Weird error

Just another detail, now I've switched the router back on while connected to console and after passing the bootstrap and image decompression its running millions of lines saying Corrected ECC from L2 cache or memory Could anyone shed some light here? Thanks, Ziv -Original Message-

Re: [c-nsp] HSRP Packet Forwarding

Hi Oliver, Why are you asking? It is related to issue when switch-1 is involved with layer 2 loop and send back the HSRP packets to 7609-2. Thanks, Alaerte -Original Message- From: ext Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 3:24 AM To:

[c-nsp] Strange PIX interface problem

Hi folks, I just reset a Pix 515E to factory default using the command wr erase. I am now trying to reconfigure it again and it looks like everything is working fine except the interfaces I cannot seem to bring them up When I type the command interface Ethernet 1 form the config prompt its

Re: [c-nsp] Strange PIX interface problem

Here it is below I have only put the Ip as I am trying to login to the PDM : PIX Version 6.3(3) interface ethernet0 auto shutdown interface ethernet1 auto shutdown nameif ethernet0 outside security0 nameif ethernet1 inside security100 enable password 8Ry2YjIyt7RRXU24 encrypted passwd

Re: [c-nsp] Redistribution BGP/OSPF best practice

Nathan mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Monday, February 25, 2008 10:42 AM: and OSPF? I redistribute some internal routes between BGP and OSPF, but the why and the how to avoid of that is a story in itself. This problem is coming back to bite me again. I have routers in

Re: [c-nsp] Strange PIX interface problem

try 'interface ethernet1 auto' or 'no interface ethernet1 auto shutdown' You can see in the configuration that its currently in shutdown mode. Regards, W On 25/02/2008, Peter Nyamukusa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here it is below I have only put the Ip as I am trying to login to the PDM :

Re: [c-nsp] Strange PIX interface problem

Peter can you include a 'show run' ? On 25/02/2008, Peter Nyamukusa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi folks, I just reset a Pix 515E to factory default using the command wr erase. I am now trying to reconfigure it again and it looks like everything is working fine except the interfaces I

Re: [c-nsp] Strange PIX interface problem

I tried both commands before with no success pixfirewall(config)# interface ethernet1 auto pixfirewall(config)# sh int e1 interface ethernet1 inside is up, line protocol is down Hardware is i82559 ethernet, address is 0012.7f5b.deee IP address 192.168.1.1, subnet mask 255.255.255.0 MTU

[c-nsp] [ME6524] port based EoMPLS

List, I would like to report a problem with ME6524s that I have in the testlab network at the moment. I am testing them since 4 weeks now and I hit a big show stopper. At the moment I am concetrated on EoMPLS and checking the port-based (Type 5) EoMPLS cross-connects. I am questioning their

Re: [c-nsp] Strange PIX interface problem

Hi William, It looks like the 'interface ethernet1 auto' command has solved the problem Many thanks for the effort Cheers Peter -Original Message- From: William [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 3:50 PM To: Peter Nyamukusa Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject:

[c-nsp] 3750G and 3750E in a stack

Hi all, Is it possible to mix C3750E and C3750 in stackwise thing ? I need to run a stack made of x2 C3750, but also x2 C3750E for ensuring 10Gig uplinks, is there any reason why the stackwise connection wouldn't be compatible between these two models ?

[c-nsp] NAT-PT

Hi, I'm currently trying to configure NAT-PT to allow our IPv6-only clients to access IPv4 hosts. We've bought an 2811 for this task (among others) and I tried following http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2t/ipv6/SA_natpt_ps6350_TSD_Products_Configuration_Guide_Chapter.html#wp1073195

[c-nsp] BGP question

Hi! What does next-hop mismatch mean ? sh ip bgp x.x.x.x/x BGP routing table entry for x.x.x.x/x, version 267318576 Paths: (2 available, best #2, table Default-IP-Routing-Table - next-hop mismatch) Flag: 0x820 Not advertised to any peer Regards, Ahmad table Default-IP-Routing-Table -

Re: [c-nsp] 3640 Flash Upgrade

I used to have this problem with new (3rd party) flash for 2600's where the flash was not formatted correctly from the manufacturer. Have you tried to using XMODEM to load your new image straight to DRAM and bypass the flash? Once you have the router running you can format the flash correctly and

Re: [c-nsp] BGP question

I think next-hop-mismatch means that BGP wasn't able to install the prefix in the RIB as there is already a non-BGP route, and didn't advertise it because the BGP next-hop doesn't match this route's next-hop. What does show ip bgp rib-failure say? Which version are you running on this box?

Re: [c-nsp] BGP question

Hi Oliver, Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) schrieb: I think next-hop-mismatch means that BGP wasn't able to install the prefix in the RIB as there is already a non-BGP route, and didn't advertise it because the BGP next-hop doesn't match this route's next-hop. What does show ip bgp rib-failure

Re: [c-nsp] [ME6524] port based EoMPLS

Mateusz Blaszczyk wrote on Monday, February 25, 2008 2:00 PM: List, I would like to report a problem with ME6524s that I have in the testlab network at the moment. I am testing them since 4 weeks now and I hit a big show stopper. At the moment I am concetrated on EoMPLS and checking the

Re: [c-nsp] BGP question

Hi! When I add a static route for this prefix, then this happens: sh ip bgp x.x.x.x/19 BGP routing table entry for x.x.x.x/19, version 267365606 Paths: (2 available, best #2, table Default-IP-Routing-Table, RIB-failure(17)) Flag: 0x820 sh ip bgp rib-failure NetworkNext Hop

Re: [c-nsp] [ME6524] port based EoMPLS

you might be hitting CSCsm70349 (BPDU traffic over Eompls is not switched on 3C system). Can you try downgrading to 12.2(33)SXH or 12.2(18)SXFsomething to verify as the above bug seems to be a regression in SXH1 specifically? I confirm that on SXH it works... BPDU are forwarded now for

Re: [c-nsp] 3650G Port security and multicast.

Hi, interface GigabitEthernet0/1 switchport access vlan 3 switchport mode access switchport nonegotiate flowcontrol receive on spanning-tree portfast ! ip multicast boundary ACLNAME alan ___ cisco-nsp mailing list

[c-nsp] 3650G Port security and multicast.

Hello, I need to filter multicast (all multicast) on every ports of a big group of switchs using basic 3560G. Current configuration is such way : ! interface GigabitEthernet0/1 switchport access vlan 3 switchport mode access switchport nonegotiate flowcontrol receive on spanning-tree

Re: [c-nsp] [ME6524] port based EoMPLS

I am running 12.2(18)SXF12 in my lab and BPDU's are being switched OK over EoMPLS... CE2#show spanning-tree vlan 200 VLAN0200 Spanning tree enabled protocol ieee Root IDPriority32968 Address 0005.ddc0.0d00 Cost4 Port11

Re: [c-nsp] NAT-PT

Bernhard Schmidt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm currently trying to configure NAT-PT to allow our IPv6-only clients to access IPv4 hosts. We've bought an 2811 for this task (among others) and I tried following Okay, I have to test these thoroughly tomorrow, but my preliminary findings are as

[c-nsp] Question about L2VPN Switching feature

From : http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0s/feature/guide/fsstitch.html I'd like to use this feature to extend an EoMPLS pseudowire across AS boundaries. It mentions use of l2 vfi on the inter-AS boundary, this would tend to indicate use of VPLS, Does this technique apply to EoMPLS

Re: [c-nsp] 3650G Port security and multicast.

Xavier Beaudouin wrote: Hello, I need to filter multicast (all multicast) on every ports of a big group of switchs using basic 3560G. Current configuration is such way : ! interface GigabitEthernet0/1 switchport access vlan 3 switchport mode access switchport nonegotiate

Re: [c-nsp] 3650G Port security and multicast.

Adrian Minta wrote: Xavier Beaudouin wrote: Here is any magic way to filter / remove any multicast traffic from machines connected on Gi 0/1 (eg avoid machine that is on this port to send any multicast packets on network). ! interface GigabitEthernet0/1 switchport access vlan 3

Re: [c-nsp] 3650G Port security and multicast.

Jeff Kell wrote: Adrian Minta wrote: Xavier Beaudouin wrote: Here is any magic way to filter / remove any multicast traffic from machines connected on Gi 0/1 (eg avoid machine that is on this port to send any multicast packets on network). ! interface GigabitEthernet0/1 switchport

Re: [c-nsp] 3650G Port security and multicast.

Hi, On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 05:38:01PM +0100, Xavier Beaudouin wrote: Here is any magic way to filter / remove any multicast traffic from machines connected on Gi 0/1 (eg avoid machine that is on this port to send any multicast packets on network). Be careful with that. Killing *all*

Re: [c-nsp] NPE-G2: mixed interrupt/polling packet processing on POS interface

For G2 vs G1 that's correct. For ethernet vs. serial the performance from what I recall is less. Rodney On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 12:35:32PM +0100, Ultramajestic wrote: So as far as I understand, the performance is not degraded, isn't it? El mi??, 20-02-2008 a las 09:30 -0500, Rodney Dunn

Re: [c-nsp] 3650G Port security and multicast.

Hi, On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 09:30:25PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Be careful with that. Killing *all* multicast will kill IPv6. really? i wasnt aware that IPv6 *required* multicast or used multicast to operate - which feature or part of IPv6 is this? Neighbour discovery (the thing

[c-nsp] 3750 SVI vs Routed port

Is there a difference in performance on the 3750 platform between a SVI (vLAN) interface and a routed port (no switchport in interface config), in terms of IP routing? -- ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ___

Re: [c-nsp] 3650G Port security and multicast.

Hi, Neighbour discovery (the thing that replaces ARP) and router advertisement / router discovery all use multicast. There is no broadcast in IPv6 anymore, it has been completely replaced by job specific multicast groups. many thanks for the explanation - I'll now have to have a look at

Re: [c-nsp] 3650G Port security and multicast.

many thanks for the explanation - I'll now have to have a look at some nets that I've got which dont have multicast enabled but are happily doing IPv6 - i'm slightly confused! :-) This is Link Layer Multicast, so as long as you don't put the proposed configlets you should be ok in Access

Re: [c-nsp] NAT-PT

you may want to look at what pfs has done here at apricot. http://www.civil-tongue.net/clusterf/wiki/APRICOT2008-Router randy ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at

Re: [c-nsp] 3750 SVI vs Routed port

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there a difference in performance on the 3750 platform between a SVI (vLAN) interface and a routed port (no switchport in interface config), in terms of IP routing? No. A 'routed port' on a 3750 is mostly just an SVI on a internal VLAN with only one port in it. So

Re: [c-nsp] 3750 SVI vs Routed port

But does spanning tree run on that internal VLAN? Jim -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Marco van den Bovenkamp Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 5:15 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 3750 SVI vs Routed port [EMAIL

[c-nsp] ASA Firewall vs IOS

Hey folks. Anyone know if the latest IOS with FW feature sets on 2821 or 3825 will block MSN messenger at *application level* ? We currently have an ASA5520 with AIP-10 and it works perfect for this but hoping to replace with a more readily available commodity router.;) Cisco claimed

Re: [c-nsp] ASA Firewall vs IOS

Anyone using PfR ? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 10:10 PM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] ASA Firewall vs IOS Hey folks. Anyone know if the latest

Re: [c-nsp] ASA Firewall vs IOS

It's not as powerful/flexible/usable as one would expect/hope. I have many customers that just turned it off. Not ready for primetime on the IOS. tv - Original Message - From: Paul Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 9:10 PM Subject:

Re: [c-nsp] ASA Firewall vs IOS

Thanks... I was afraid of that. Have ran FW on IOS for various reasons but it's definitely no match for the ASA stuff... got a couple of offline replies stating that MSN still isn't blockable at the application level in the FW Feature Set.. shame... :) Paul -Original Message- From:

Re: [c-nsp] 3650G Port security and multicast.

Hi, On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:30:08PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: many thanks for the explanation - I'll now have to have a look at some nets that I've got which dont have multicast enabled but are happily doing IPv6 - i'm slightly confused! :-) As this is just link-layer multicast,

Re: [c-nsp] NPE-G1 high CPU utilization due to 'BGP Router'

Hi, just for the record: Ben Steele schrieb: None of your neighbors are flapping or at least their route tables? No. could be BGP RIB tables constantly being updated by unstable peer, check to see if any have excessive updates, is the router meshed with any others via iBGP? Yes an