[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Tuesday, April 15, 2008 10:18 PM:
Hi,
Considering the topology where MPLS VPN over TE is used:
(2 links between PE1--PE2)
CustA--PE1PE2CustA
| |
CustB___| |_CustB
What are the possibilities of
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 02:53:10PM -0500, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
So, I'm wondering if anybody else has seen this problem... I now have
several 6704s on several different 6500/7600 boxes which seem to be
experiencing input queue drops for no identifiable reason, and well short
of their
We even use 122-33.SRC on G2's because when we enabled a second atm
interface the router crashed on 12.4.x IOS.
Koen
Frank Bulk - iNAME wrote:
I've received at least one positive recommendation for 12.2(31)SB11 offlist.
I can't recall any negatives at this time.
Frank
-Original
Hi list
I'm playing around with dhcp on cisco and it seams that c7600 (SRB)
isn't relaying DHCP release messages from clients to the DHCP server.
(i'm using ip helper address)
Is this the expected behavior?
Regards
MKS
___
cisco-nsp mailing list
Hello,
Does anyone have any experience with Fibernet Telecom Group? I am mainly
interested in their metro ethernet services.
-RS
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at
On Wednesday 16 April 2008 15:47, MKS wrote:
Hi list
I'm playing around with dhcp on cisco and it seams that c7600 (SRB)
isn't relaying DHCP release messages from clients to the DHCP server.
(i'm using ip helper address)
Is this the expected behavior?
It is. If you expect *option 82*, you
Can anybody share experiense about how many sessions with Per-Session QoS
(shaping or policing) could NPE-G1 handle?
- ?-
??: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ?? ? David Granzer
??: 10 ?? 2008 ?. 18:35
: Gregory Boehnlein
?:
I have a 7609/SUP720 (12.2(18)SXF10) chassis with the following results:
7609#sh platform hardware capacity forwarding
L2 Forwarding Resources
MAC Table usage: Module Collisions Total Used %Used
10 65536 18004
No. Never will.
Rodney
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 09:28:23PM -0400, David Coulson wrote:
On a separate note - A long time ago Rodney and others were talking
about SB for 7500s. Did that ever happen?
james edwards wrote:
Is anyone running 122-31.SBxx on the 7206 NPE-400 and/or G2 ? If so,
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [Wed 16 Apr 2008, 15:57 CEST]:
Does anyone have any experience with Fibernet Telecom Group? I am
mainly interested in their metro ethernet services.
This is a mailing list about using Cisco equipment in a network service
provider environment. Please
Tks Oli,
I believe it is a trend due to FastReroute recovery for VPN customers.
Maybe it change soon with IP FastReroute. Maybe not :)
I will test it again with your suggestion.
Tks again,
Alaerte
-Original Message-
From: ext Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent:
You may also need no ip dhcp relay information check if option 82 is added by
another relay (L2) agent.
--
Tassos
Alfred Nagl wrote on 16/4/2008 5:11 μμ:
On Wednesday 16 April 2008 15:47, MKS wrote:
Hi list
I'm playing around with dhcp on cisco and it seams that c7600 (SRB)
isn't relaying
Hi,
Do you know if there is a feature navigator for XR?
Particularly trying to confirm that BFD-triggered Fast Reroute (FRR) is
there on 3.3.0
Tks,
Alaerte
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
On 4/16/08, Andrey Kostin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can anybody share experiense about how many sessions with Per-Session QoS
(shaping or policing) could NPE-G1 handle?
At this time with mix of policing and shaping per session enabled
(terminating PPPoE) we have about 3.5k sessions, 50 kpps
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Wednesday, April 16, 2008 4:57 PM:
Hi,
Do you know if there is a feature navigator for XR?
Particularly trying to confirm that BFD-triggered Fast Reroute (FRR)
is there on 3.3.0
yes, see
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios_xr_sw/iosxr_r3.3/interfaces/configur
Greetings!
So I'm running into a issue where I've configured a bunch of Cisco
LWAPPs. The idea was to statically assign the IP address and to which
Controller (Primary/Secondary) the LWAPP would join.
Everything worked fine. No issues.
A couple days later I found out that the WLC
I am trying to configure an ASA in Transparent mode running 7.2(3) version of
code. It has trunk interfaces trunking vlans 100,101 on both the inside and
outside interfaces of the device. However the ASA will not let me assign VLAN
100,101 to subinterfaces on both sides of the firewall. Does
Email me off-line, I have working configs for this.
Regards,
Ge Moua | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Design Engineer
University of Minnesota | Networking Telecommunications Services
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Louis
Sent:
You should be assigning the WLC controller names in the LWAPP AP configuration
using their system name. You can use DNS entries to make the transition easier.
Do not use IP addresses though. As long as the AP can join one controller, and
that controller is in the same mobility group as all the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Cisco Security Advisory: Cisco Network Admission Control Shared Secret
Vulnerability
Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20080416-nac
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa-20080416-nac.shtml
Revision 1.0
For Public Release 2008 April 16 1600 UTC (GMT
Agreed, but I was rather asking why people start selectively route vrfs
over specific tunnels?
If you deploy a FRR solution, you might as well send all traffic over it
(some caveats might apply, for example a possible loss of load-sharing)
by enabling autoroute-announce..
Another thought on
They were configured through the WCS and the primary and secondary
controller specifications were assigned by the names.
-Original Message-
From: Mike Louis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 11:30 AM
To: Jeff Cartier; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [c-nsp]
Continued...
So if they were assigned by names...lets say...WLC1 (primary) and WLC2
(secondary). How would I use DNS entries to transition them?
-Original Message-
From: Mike Louis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 11:30 AM
To: Jeff Cartier;
Check if you don't have no service dhcp, you'll need service DHCP
Maarten
--
Network Engineer | eBay / Marktplaats.nl Randweg 25 | 8304 AS Emmeloord
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Mobile: +31 6 55 1 222 47
On 4/16/08 3:47 PM, MKS [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi list
I'm playing around with dhcp
Totally agree, DHCP + option 43? I think it's 43. I forget :)
--
Regards,
Jason Plank
CCIE #16560
e: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Original message --
From: Mike Louis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You should be assigning the WLC controller names in the LWAPP AP
configuration
Well, we're going to implement TE basics, simply because we are already
in the middle of making some major design changes. If we're going to use
it, which we have no specific plans to yet, it'll probably mostly be for
CBR, and maybe some lng explicit paths for simulated high latency.
And TE
Peter Rathlev mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on Wednesday, April 16,
2008 5:45 PM:
And TE is a very exciting subject; it's always fun to have more
control. :-)
Hehe, more control, more complexity :)
By the way: Is this loss of load sharing you mention specific to FRR,
or is it an integral
You wouldn't. It does not work like that. You would setup a special DNS
entry for something like CISCOLWAPPCONTROLLER.localdomain. or whatever (read
the Cisco docs, it is all clearly described). You point that DNS entry
towards the WLC addresses. Another option would be DHCP options, which is
Why off-list? Do share, others might benefit.
Fred Reimer, CISSP, CCNP, CQS-VPN, CQS-ISS
Senior Network Engineer
Coleman Technologies, Inc.
954-298-1697
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:cisco-nsp-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ge Moua
Sent: Wednesday, April 16,
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 12:20:34PM -0400, Paul Stewart wrote:
Hi there...
I am trying to turn up netflow reporting on a 6500 - ran into this before
and can't remember the solution;)
On the reporting server I'm not getting the correct levels of data - almost
like it's sampling the data
Hi there...
I am trying to turn up netflow reporting on a 6500 - ran into this before
and can't remember the solution;)
On the reporting server I'm not getting the correct levels of data - almost
like it's sampling the data by default...
Can someone tell me the missing piece here? I've
I tried emailing attachments to the 'list' before, and this was rejected.
I'm always open to sharing by any means necessary.
Regards,
Ge Moua | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Design Engineer
University of Minnesota | Networking Telecommunications Services
-Original Message-
From:
Not sure what IOS you are running, which can make a difference, but
you are probably only seeing route-processor flows and not mls
switched flows.
There should be an interface command like ip flow-cache or ip flow
ingress. There are other commands that enable BRIDGED flows to be
Hi,
I was looking for some documentation on 'MPLS over L3TPv3' for 7200s - I can
only find plain L2TPv3.
I would appreciate if the list could help me on the configuration or lead to
some documentation on it.
Regards,
Deepak
___
Hi Oli,
Do you know where is XR configuration of BFD for TE on XR?
IOS has page for it:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/mpls/configuration/guide/mp_te_bfd_f
rr.html#wp1064977
But XR page I found only mention support, not commands.
Tks,
Alaerte
-Original Message-
From: ext Oliver
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 13:15 -0400, Jeff Fitzwater wrote:
snip
There are other commands that enable BRIDGED flows to be
included, (port to port within switch) but don't remember what they
are.
Export of switched flows could be ip flow ingress layer2-switched vlan
VLAN-RANGE, at least on
Anyone have a SPA-5X1GE-V2 running in a 6500 with a SUP720 and a
7600-SIP-400? If so, would you mind telling what version of IOS you are
running?
Thanks,
Fred Reimer, CISSP, CCNP, CQS-VPN, CQS-ISS
Senior Network Engineer
Coleman Technologies, Inc.
954-298-1697
smime.p7s
On Apr 15, 2008, at 6:52 PM, james edwards wrote:
Is anyone running 122-31.SBxx on the 7206 NPE-400 and/or G2 ? If so,
what
SBxx and what is your experience ?
122-31.SB11 is the latest and contains fixes that apply to me, but
it was
released Feb. of this year
so I am wondering if it is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on
Wednesday, April 16, 2008 8:25 PM:
Hi Oli,
Do you know where is XR configuration of BFD for TE on XR?
IOS has page for it:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/mpls/configuration/guide/mp_te_bfd_f
rr.html#wp1064977
But XR page I found
I'm stuck with older hardware (VXRs, and GSRs) and trying to plan for its
eventual demise...
At what point should one expect the G1 to actually top out on PPS? I've
heard anecdotal claims of 200-225Mbps with voip-sized (200byte) packets for
something around 125kpps, which is dramatically lower
Hi Fred,
yes we are. SUP720-3BXL, 12.2(33)SRB2, and going to upgrade to SRB3
which has been released on Apr, 14th. We found the SPA-5X1GE-V2 not
being supported on SRA, for example.
Cheers,
Paolo
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 02:09:30PM -0400, Fred Reimer wrote:
Anyone have a SPA-5X1GE-V2 running
41 matches
Mail list logo
