It is a good question.
The RFC describes the scopes of the 3 opaque LSAs. LSA11 has AS scope
like LSA5. Nothing related to MPLS TE though. As far as I researched
and read LSA10 is used in MPLS TE.
br
Ovidiu
On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 9:38 PM, Shimol Shah shims...@cisco.com wrote:
5250 obsoletes
Hi Bob,
I suggest you to receive full bgp routes from both your provider if your
router is capable to handle it. so that you can tune your outgoing traffic
as required. As you are receiving only default route from primary provider
and full bgp table from secondary, then it will be complicated to
Eric Cables ecab...@gmail.com writes:
Sorry if this is a bit OT, but I was wondering what configuration frontend
people have settled on for Nagios.
emacs (or vi) and some shell / perl
Jens
--
-
| Foelderichstr. 40 |
On 13/04/10 21:58, Eric Cables wrote:
Sorry if this is a bit OT, but I was wondering what configuration frontend
We generate ours from our registration database (a.k.a. IPAM system - a
postgres DB with web UI)
It's a model I can heartily endorse; it forces you to keep the
registration DB
Hi Stephen,
I think that Cisco is saying you should use different carries because
if you have 3-4 3G cards with services from the same carrier all those
3G cards will associate with the same wireless phone cell and that
cell may or may not have enough uplink bandwidth. For example if that
cell
Our vendor wants to do a dog pony show on the new 3750X (and 3560X
and 2960S) switches that Cisco has just released.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10745/index.html
We're about to plonk down a big chunk of money to buy 3750G switches
to replace a lot of our older network gear.
We don't
Under the very clear heading of personal opinion, I have always tried to buy
the best equipment I could. I tend to have to use equipment longer than I
would normally like. I know if I were ordering equipment for a new building
on campus today, I would would want the PoE+ and the 10G option for
Having the ability to place two power supplies in the chassis and also
having the power stacking to share power supplies across multiple chassis
really has me interested. The rest I mostly perceive as fluff, even if it is
nice fluff.
On 14 April 2010 07:57, Jeffrey Ollie j...@ocjtech.us wrote:
I have an ME3400 running 12.2(46)SE that will not pass (much) more
than 1000pps through its copper gig port. The interface counters hover
around 1000pps tx/rx, while the bps rate fluctuates (presumable due to
the variable packet sizes getting thrown at it). There are no service
policys or rate
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Cisco Security Advisory: Cisco Secure Desktop ActiveX Control Code
Execution Vulnerability
Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20100414-csd
Revision 1.0
+-
Summary
===
Cisco Secure Desktop
Still missing one killer feature that I would really like to see present in the
access/distribution layers: NetFlow
On Apr 14, 2010, at 10:44 AM, Saxon Jones wrote:
Having the ability to place two power supplies in the chassis and also
having the power stacking to share power supplies across
On 14/04/2010 17:30, Andrew Tolstykh wrote:
Still missing one killer feature that I would really like to see present
in the access/distribution layers: NetFlow
and sflow for l2 stuff.
Nick
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
You're doing or testing something wrong. (It's not possible to say
what with the limited information you provide). The ME-3400 will
happily do line rate.
-A
On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:57:47 -0400, you wrote:
I have an ME3400 running 12.2(46)SE that will not pass (much) more
than 1000pps through
On 14 April 2010 11:57, Jeremy Parr jeremyp...@gmail.com wrote:
I have an ME3400 running 12.2(46)SE that will not pass (much) more
than 1000pps through its copper gig port. The interface counters hover
around 1000pps tx/rx, while the bps rate fluctuates (presumable due to
the variable packet
Which means the 3400 CPU and not the switching engine is forwarding
the packets... how many routes are you trying to feed the 3400 ?
Rubens
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Jeremy Parr jeremyp...@gmail.com wrote:
On 14 April 2010 11:57, Jeremy Parr jeremyp...@gmail.com wrote:
I have an
On 14/04/2010 17:40, Jeremy Parr wrote:
I am also seeing the following in the logs
%PLATFORM_UCAST-6-PREFIX: One or more, more specific prefixes could
not be programmed into TCAM and are being covered by a less specific
prefix
Congratulations, you have managed to turn your ME3400 into
Hello,
We use more than 100 of ME3400 and ME3400G for a long time..
We have never seen such problems. For example:
5 minute input rate 5544000 bits/sec, 2253 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 3593000 bits/sec, 2006 packets/sec
This is ME3400 with 12.2(35)SE1
Full-duplex, 1000Mb/s, link
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:40:46PM -0400, Jeremy Parr wrote:
On 14 April 2010 11:57, Jeremy Parr jeremyp...@gmail.com wrote:
I have an ME3400 running 12.2(46)SE that will not pass (much) more
than 1000pps through its copper gig port. The interface counters hover
around 1000pps tx/rx, while
How may arp entries is the device learning? Each one of them will
translate to a /32 in the hardware FIB.
Ian
On 4/14/10 10:41 AM, Everton da Silva Marques wrote:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:40:46PM -0400, Jeremy Parr wrote:
On 14 April 2010 11:57, Jeremy Parr jeremyp...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 01:59:02PM -0400, Jean-Francois Levesque wrote:
What is the output of
# sh sdm prefer
ME3400#sh sdm prefer
The current template is layer-2 template.
The selected template optimizes the resources in
the switch to support this level of features for
8 routed
You are using layer-2 template with no place in the TCAM for ip
routes. If you are using this switch as a L3 switch, take a look at the
default template.
For more info:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/metro/me3400/software/release/12.2_52_se/configuration/guide/swsdm.html
JF
What is the output of
# sh sdm prefer
JF
Everton da Silva Marques wrote:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:40:46PM -0400, Jeremy Parr wrote:
On 14 April 2010 11:57, Jeremy Parr jeremyp...@gmail.com wrote:
I have an ME3400 running 12.2(46)SE that will not pass (much) more
than 1000pps through its
This message is printed even with a single default route, if you happen
to use the l2 sdm template.
--
Tassos
Everton da Silva Marques wrote on 14/04/2010 20:41:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:40:46PM -0400, Jeremy Parr wrote:
On 14 April 2010 11:57, Jeremy Parrjeremyp...@gmail.com wrote:
Opaque LSA types 9-11 are used for TE reachability. I tried to google this, but
didn't find any hits. I think the best reference for this area is Eric Osborn's
RSVP-TE book, its excellent. To be honest, the best way to learn this is to try
it out in a lab, it is just not very well documented.
That's it! Thanks a lot!
Everton
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 02:09:03PM -0400, Jean-Francois Levesque wrote:
You are using layer-2 template with no place in the TCAM for ip
routes. If you are using this switch as a L3 switch, take a look at the
default template.
For more info:
We are a multi-homed ISP with connections to 2 different providers (AS
Numbers) Does the bgp maximum-paths 2 command have any effect on load
balancing between the 2 connections since they are different AS's or
does that command only work when you have multiple paths to the same AS?
--
Thanks Luan.
I tried indeed and it worked.
However, since offset-list actually modifies the metric and all those ext eigrp
routes are still viewable with an AD of 170, how does it happen for them to be
preferable over internal eigrp ones??
Finally what is the difference of an offset-list when
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Chris Gotstein
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 1:04 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] bgp maximum-paths
We are a multi-homed ISP with connections to
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Chris Gotstein ch...@uplogon.com wrote:
We are a multi-homed ISP with connections to 2 different providers (AS
Numbers) Does the bgp maximum-paths 2 command have any effect on load
balancing between the 2 connections since they are different AS's or
does that
Does this seem like a valid way to load balance?
http://ccnalab.net/bgp-routing/bgp-load-sharing-2-isp/
Chris Gotstein, Sr Network Engineer, UP Logon/Computer Connection UP
http://uplogon.com | +1 906 774 4847 | ch...@uplogon.com
On 4/14/2010 4:23 PM, MrPaul wrote:
On Wed,
What if you used a different routing protocol on the backdoor link and
redistributed (carefully) between EIGRP and the diff routing protocol on the
backdoor router at each location? You'd have external EIGRP routes
everywhere then and could create different seed metrics at the MPLS border
(CE
Phil Smith has some good introductory slides on the nanog archive. There are
lots of tools for attempting to influence the return path of your traffic.
(Assuming this is the load balancing you're trying to do). Selective
prepending, announcing sub-aggregates along with your full aggregate, etc.
Are you wanting to load balance inbound, outbound, or both?
Without knowing all the details the cleanest solution would be to split your
address space in half. Then send one half to provider A and the other half
to provider B. Also send the entire network block to both provider A B
for backup
It's inbound i'm mostly concerned with. I'm taking full routes from
both providers. Paths to both a relatively equal, so the path with the
lowest ID is winning, causing it to be overloaded.
Chris Gotstein, Sr Network Engineer, UP Logon/Computer Connection UP
Pick the top as numbers, set local-pref higher on the other link. Instant
traffic management.
Manolo
-Original Message-
From: Chris Gotstein ch...@uplogon.com
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 16:48:06
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
\cisco-...@puck.nether.net\cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject:
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 12:07 PM, Andrei-Marius Radu andr...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Stephen,
I think that Cisco is saying you should use different carries because
if you have 3-4 3G cards with services from the same carrier all those
3G cards will associate with the same wireless phone cell and
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 16:26 -0500, Chris Gotstein wrote:
Does this seem like a valid way to load balance?
http://ccnalab.net/bgp-routing/bgp-load-sharing-2-isp/
(For the lazy on the list: The document explains prepending your own AS
on an inbound route-map from each provider, thus making the
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 08:57 -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
So, before the meeting, does anyone else have opinions or questions
that I should be asking?
Ask them when they will begin supporting software upgrades per-member in
a stack. :-)
The power sharing looks impressive. And it supports MACsec,
the X-models are at a lower list price then the E-models.
thanks
.siva
On Thu, 15 Apr 2010, Peter Rathlev wrote:
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 08:57 -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
So, before the meeting, does anyone else have opinions or questions
that I should be asking?
Ask them when they will
On 4/14/10 2:48 PM, Chris Gotstein ch...@uplogon.com wrote:
It's inbound i'm mostly concerned with. I'm taking full routes from
both providers. Paths to both a relatively equal, so the path with the
lowest ID is winning, causing it to be overloaded.
Chris Gotstein, Sr
I couldn't find the maximum routes when one uses the IPv4+IPv6
template, is it the same of 3750, as the IPv4 only number seems to be
?
Rubens
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Siva Valliappan svall...@cisco.com wrote:
the X-models are at a lower list price then the E-models.
thanks
.siva
I've looked into the communities option, but only Qwest supports them,
my other provider doesn't support communities at this time. Though the
Qwest link is the one i want to push more traffic to, so maybe i can
just use their communities and see what happens.
On 4/14/2010 7:56 PM, Michael K.
If you're email is your AS, then it looks like you have Qwest and a more
local provider.
I love how people on these lists casually deduces someone's AS and
upstream from the mail header and gives more specific advice. Love
it. :)
___
cisco-nsp
On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 01:39:18 +0200, you wrote:
Are these X-models considerably more expensive than E-models?
Less.
Or are they targeted at replacing the E-models?
Yes, both E and G, as far as I'm told.
(The final prices are not in the GPL)
-A
___
44 matches
Mail list logo
