Re: [c-nsp] DHCPv6
Hi, On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 12:47:09AM +0200, Eugeniu Patrascu wrote: On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Jeyamurali Sivapathasundaram sjeyamur...@gmail.com wrote: Ipv6 address autoconfig default Injects a default route as well. DHCPv6 does not give out default routing information to clients. So? Nobody said ipv6 address autoconfig would use DHCPv6 for that. gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de pgp7FzsmGV38d.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] pvc l2transport
Hi all AM trying to simulate AToM on ATM point to point interfaces , can anyone provide the IOS image I can use ? ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] DHCPv6
On Sun, 5 Jan 2014, Eugeniu Patrascu wrote: So? Nobody said ipv6 address autoconfig would use DHCPv6 for that. Clarifying that that DHCP in IPv6 works differently than DHCP in IPv4. I think that the OP and also another person were under the impression that they can get a default from the DHCP server. DHCPv6 does not currently provide a default route to clients. There has been a fairly spirited argument on the NANOG list re: whether the decision not to include an option for setting a default route via DHCPv6 was right or wrong. My personal opinion is that this feature should have been part of DHCPv6 from the very beginning - for the sake of feature parity between DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 - but I was not a part of those discussions. jms ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] DHCPv6
There's finally discussion and documentation for DHCPv6 to provide more than just a client address and on the flip side ( and the other stupidity) extensions so that SLAAC can provide eg DNS servers and NTP server details which will finally make it more auto config and mean no more dual stack SLAAC+DHCPv4 shenanigans Alan -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] DHCPv6
Hi, On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 10:44:32AM -0500, Justin M. Streiner wrote: My personal opinion is that this feature should have been part of DHCPv6 from the very beginning - for the sake of feature parity between DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 - but I was not a part of those discussions. It would be good for the signal-to-noise ratio to *not* have this discussion on every single mailing list in the world. Again. *Please* keep is DHCPv6 or RA the loonie camp? *off* cisco-nsp. gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de pgpKqf1VZPazZ.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP...
When you move to ipv6 :) Jey S. Network Engineer CCIE #41608 Sent from my iPhone On 2 Jan 2014, at 18:17, Blake Dunlap iki...@gmail.com wrote: I'm still waiting for the day that HSRP can use pure L2 addresses to communicate and not burn 3 ips... On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de wrote: Hi, On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 07:54:10PM +, Phil Mayers wrote: On 31/12/2013 19:40, Gert Doering wrote: On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 03:59:18PM +, Phil Mayers wrote: (Note that changing the HSRP version does not have this property; the old vMAC will be removed from the FDB, and the box won't forward traffic destined to it) Could someone remind me why I have to change HSRP to v2 to be able to Not sure about that - maybe some fixed-size field in the HSRPv1 packet? Been a while since I looked at it in a sniffer. Having a different packet format for IPv6 makes sense, as, uh, it's not IPv4 anyway :-) - but forcing me to move our IPv4 HSRP groups to v2 (which incurs a reachability hit) to be able to enable *different* HSRP groups for IPv6 later on is just so slightly annoying. [..] HSRP has a lot of weird edge cases on Cisco gear. IIRC a lot of them relate to the size of the CPU MAC-address receive filter, and other tedious crap that wouldn't matter if they moved off CPUs from last millenium. True. Plus programmers that have never worked with a real network, where things actually *evolve* over time... [..] In fairness to Cisco, other vendors have blind spots. Juniper makes you type a truly tedious amount of config to get VRRP working, though at least commit scripts can automate that out of existence. True, that one was done by someone who never had to do a router setup as well, I bet. gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! // www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de fax: +49-89-35655025 g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] DHCPv6
hey, *Please* keep is DHCPv6 or RA the loonie camp?*off* cisco-nsp. While it's not correct place for political discussions, it's good to see this in vendor specific lists where people deal with actual networks and actual deployments. This, in my mind, is another example why default route in DHCPv6 should happen - people expect it to be there. Same for extended options in RA. -- tarko ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] Citrix Netscalers with Cisco port channels
Is any one using Netscalers with Cisco switches ? Having any problems with port channels ? Trunked or access switch ports ? If they are working for you just fine I'd like to know that too. I am most interested in 5500s with 10.x code. Thank you, ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Citrix Netscalers with Cisco port channels
I'm not sure what model switch it's connected to but some of my coworker's recently opened a case with Citrix because the Netscaler was rebooting and the port channel wouldn't come back up after the reboot. I believe one of the interfaces would flap if I remember correctly. It's been sent to Citrix's escalation team but so far they've said that there's no fix. On Jan 5, 2014 11:43 PM, Chris Stand cstand...@gmail.com wrote: Is any one using Netscalers with Cisco switches ? Having any problems with port channels ? Trunked or access switch ports ? If they are working for you just fine I'd like to know that too. I am most interested in 5500s with 10.x code. Thank you, ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
[c-nsp] DS3 Interface for a ASR1000
Hello, I have a ARS1000 and the carrier can only offer a DS3 traffic to my network. Can someone please give me the part number for a module that I can use, Ethernet (if there is) or Serial -- *Alex* ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] DS3 Interface for a ASR1000
On Monday, January 06, 2014 09:11:39 AM Alex Nyagah wrote: I have a ARS1000 and the carrier can only offer a DS3 traffic to my network. Can someone please give me the part number for a module that I can use, Ethernet (if there is) or Serial You would need a T3/E3 SPA: SPA-2XT3/E3 (2-port) SPA-4XT3/E3 (4-port) These SPA's are multi-rate, meaning you can clock them at either DS3 (T3) or E3. You'll also need to order the appropriate cables: CAB-T3E3-RF-BNC-F (RF to BNC female, 10 feet) CAB-T3E3-RF-BNC-M (RF to BNC male, 10 feet) Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] DHCPv6
Hi, On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 12:37:03AM +0200, Tarko Tikan wrote: *Please* keep is DHCPv6 or RA the loonie camp?*off* cisco-nsp. While it's not correct place for political discussions, it's good to see this in vendor specific lists where people deal with actual networks and actual deployments. This and that can not be done with cisco gear or this is how to do it with cisco gear is certainly fine, and I apologize if my mail was understood at no discussion about DHCPv6! go away!. This, in my mind, is another example why default route in DHCPv6 should happen - people expect it to be there. Same for extended options in RA. IPv6 is not IPv4. If you expect all things to be the same, there are some interesting surprises for you, like why does all my networking break if I filter all ICMP, like I do in IPv4? (answer: because you killed NDP...) Just because it is done that way in IPv4 is a very poor reason for anything. *And* it's the political discussion that is really happening on all the lists, all the time, about 15 years after it *should* have happened. gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de pgpnVyg2IZefM.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Re: [c-nsp] Citrix Netscalers with Cisco port channels
Hi, On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 10:04:11PM -0600, Chris Stand wrote: Is any one using Netscalers with Cisco switches ? Yep. Having any problems with port channels ? No problems for the classic models. The new ESX-based lots of virtual netscalers box, we couldn't get to properly work with port-channels. Trunked or access switch ports ? Did both, worked both. Config is different from Cisco, of course :-) (What I never did was port channels plus vlan trunking, I think) gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de pgp71Ecaqn1uf.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
