PW-SPAN appears to be ERSPAN with MPLS instead of GRE. So as long as you're
passing traffic between the different platforms without encapsulation then you
should be okay. Just don't expect interoperability between the two.
--Daniel Holme
On 15 Dec 2011, at 17:44, Jason Lixfeld ja...@lixfeld.ca
Nick(-2128),
the configured queue-limit does really solve the issue. At least it solves
the
increasing counters shown via show int count error.
It would be good to know how big these queues/buffers are if the
queue-limit
isn't configured explicitely, what makes the difference here, why is it
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 11:32:14AM +, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Slightly annoying, but IS-IS doesn't appear to support advertise
passive-only for ipv6 afi on SXI or 15.0M. Is this command supported on
any platform?
When I inquired in Feb 2005, it wasn't. :-)
Do you want me to be added to your feature request?
I'm getting a little frustrated, all I want is feature parity for ipv6 , it
seems like completely separate teams did the work on this platform and didn't
see how things worked in the v4 world
alan
--
Message may be brief as it has been sent
n...@rhanssen.de (Rolf Hanßen) wrote:
Hi Andrew,
just pure forwarding of a few public networks towards each other and
internet with default route.
No tunnels, no NAT, no DHCP, no VPN or something similar.
Concerning relatively cheap: Im searching for below 3000 Euro
absolutely. ;)
I'd say if he really want to go cheap, IP base probably do fine, only
difference is no BGP in it. Adv.IP services license cost half of
hardware while ipbase few hundered $.
On 16/12/11 12:27, Elmar K. Bins wrote:
The cheapest
option you have would probably be a WS-3560, but you'll need an
Cisco-wise you'll find nothing that can push bandwidth. The cheapest
option you have would probably be a WS-3560, but you'll need an
advanced ip services image which does not come for free.
But 3560 doesn't provide netflow at all (even sampled). And no SVI statistics.
So it's out of
On 12/16/2011 01:09 AM, Rolf Hanßen wrote:
Hi Andrew,
just pure forwarding of a few public networks towards each other and
internet with default route.
No tunnels, no NAT, no DHCP, no VPN or something similar.
Concerning relatively cheap: Im searching for below 3000 Euro
absolutely. ;)
You'll
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 08:58:46AM +, Alan Buxey wrote:
Do you want me to be added to your feature request?
I haven't heard anything from that anymore after Oli Boehmer's mail, so
not sure wether it was formally submitted back then. Perhaps drop Oli an
email?
I'm getting a little
On 16 December 2011 10:53, Phil Mayers p.may...@imperial.ac.uk wrote:
On 12/16/2011 01:09 AM, Rolf Hanßen wrote:
Hi Andrew,
just pure forwarding of a few public networks towards each other and
internet with default route.
No tunnels, no NAT, no DHCP, no VPN or something similar.
HI Aled,
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aled Morris al...@qix.co.uk wrote:
ASR1001 MSRP $17k + $5k for IP BASE licence
I think the IP BASE license is included with the ASR1001 for US$17K list.
Street price should be about EUR10K . (OP seems to be in euro zone).
He will however require a
On 16.12.2011 00:25, Rolf Hanßen wrote:
Hello,
I am looking for a stable, reliable router / Layer3 switch that can do the
following:
-forward at least 1GBit / 1Mpps
[..]
Rolf, sorry to say, but for the price range of 3000€ you'll have a hard
time finding anything, even used, that has both the
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 08:58:46AM +, Alan Buxey wrote:
Do you want me to be added to your feature request?
I haven't heard anything from that anymore after Oli Boehmer's mail,
so
not sure wether it was formally submitted back then. Perhaps drop Oli
an
email?
Oli is listening and
On 16/12/2011 12:27, Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) wrote:
Oli is listening and has communicated with Nick offline :-).. We added
the feature to 15.2S just recently, but I need to check when this will
be visible on other platforms..
Hi Oli,
thanks for the replies - offline and online. There's no
There are 'other' vendors out there besides Cisco who's switches provide
SFlow which will give you information you're looking for as compared to
netflow, assuming your collector supports it. These same vendor/switches
also can do the routing as you're asking about for the low cost you're
looking
On 16 December 2011 11:58, Andrew Miehs and...@2sheds.de wrote:
HI Aled,
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Aled Morris al...@qix.co.uk wrote:
ASR1001 MSRP $17k + $5k for IP BASE licence
I think the IP BASE license is included with the ASR1001 for US$17K list.
Sadly not, you have to pay.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12.12.2011 09:27, Mark Tinka wrote:
On Monday, December 12, 2011 03:38:56 PM Garry wrote:
Dec 11 22:59:31: %LDP-5-NBRCHG: LDP Neighbor [BB1]:0 is DOWN
(Received error notification from peer: Holddown time expired)
Dec 11 22:59:52:
Hello,
2nd hand is no problem, I did not think about new stuff at all.
What about a NSE-100 ? Looks cheap on Ebay.
Docs say 3.5 Mpps (PXF); 450 kpps (RP). Is IPv6 forwarded in hardware or
via RP on NSE ?
Concerning Netflow on NSE-100/NSE-150/NPE-G1/NPE-G2 cards:
What traffic amount is realistic
On Dec 16, 2011, at 5:33 AM, Robert Hass wrote:
Cisco-wise you'll find nothing that can push bandwidth. The cheapest
option you have would probably be a WS-3560, but you'll need an
advanced ip services image which does not come for free.
But 3560 doesn't provide netflow at all (even
Thanks Asbjorn
Any experience on the operations side of things for the B22HP route?
More specifically, feedback on how TAC (HP and Cisco) would look, day
to day provisioning (risk to reloading an B22HP to the rest of the HP
Blade?)...etc
thanks
p-
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Asbjorn
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 03:37:59PM +0100, Rolf Hanßen wrote:
What about a NSE-100 ? Looks cheap on Ebay.
There's a reason for that. End-of-life, and abandoned architecture (PXF).
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
Hi,
Il 16/12/2011 0.25, Rolf Hanßen ha scritto:
At the moment there is a GSR 12008 used for it but it has no IPv6 support
(apart from senseless size and power wasting).
I am a little curious about what IPv6 support/feature is missing on your
GSR 12008...
Thanks
--
BR
Tiziano
thanks for the replies - offline and online. There's no mention of
the
feature here:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios-xml/ios/ipv6/configuration/15-2s/ip6
-
is-is.html
Or in the release notes:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/15_2s/release/notes/152SRN.pdf
Is this just
On Saturday, December 17, 2011 12:32:59 AM Oliver Boehmer
(oboehmer) wrote:
route-map for ipv6 inter-level route-leaking)..
Interesting - we used the 'distribute-list' feature for
Route Leaking in v6, and it works fine referencing an IPv6
prefix list.
But yes, a route-map would move for
On Friday, December 16, 2011 10:31:21 PM Garry wrote:
I've seen high CPU before, but never in time to discern
whether the CPU was cause or effect ... just this
afternoon I was able to catch one of the outages in time
to cross-check multiple places, mainly the logs and cpu
history, which
On 16/12/2011 16:00, Gert Doering wrote:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 03:37:59PM +0100, Rolf Hanßen wrote:
What about a NSE-100 ? Looks cheap on Ebay.
There's a reason for that. End-of-life, and abandoned architecture (PXF).
and hasn't been able to handle a full DFZ since 2007 or so.
Nick
Hello all,
do you have any update news on this?
thanks
Le Luu
From: P C pc50...@gmail.com
To: Deny IP Any Any denyipany...@gmail.com
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 12:32 PM
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] keeping ASA-5585s stable
asa823-10-smp-k8 is very stable for me
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 11:39:49PM +0100, Andrew Miehs wrote:
I am currently using distribute-list prefix in on the PES to
protect EIGRP process. Without this, the other PE will end up
learning the default route via EIGRP from the first PE.
We've used EIGRP on PE-CE links in the past and
Looking for guidance regarding deploying dedicate route reflectors
that will not be in forwarding path for traffic.
These dedicated route reflectors will be connected to our core network
and curious to see what people are doing in this case to prevent RR to
be used as a transit network.
I
I'm trying to get a Cisco IOS router to enroll with a Windows 2008 R2-based CA.
I'm partially successful.
What I'd like to do:
1. Router enrolls via SCEP, no challenge password required.
2. Certificate goes into pending status and approved by a certificate manager
3. Router can automatically
At the moment there is a GSR 12008 used for it but it has no IPv6 support
(apart from senseless size and power wasting).
I am a little curious about what IPv6 support/feature is missing on your
GSR 12008...
For instance 6VPE, in IOS. Yes, this is supported in IOS XR for the
GSR, but that
31 matches
Mail list logo
