Hi Cydon ,
We had a similar problem with XR . The setup was ng-mvpn , sender site xr
receiving site juniper.
What we found is the traffic is switched to pmp-te but the counters are not
reflecting this , so you might run into the same issue.
check:
-sh mrib mpls forwarding
- sh mrib route
You can use an ACL to let IOS know which addresses to translate. So an ACL
which reads ANY to 172.16.144.0/20 - Then source NAT to the interface
Thanks
Darren
http://www.mellowd.co.uk/ccie
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2014 14:48:26 -0700
From: mike-cisconspl...@tiedyenetworks.com
To:
On Wednesday, July 02, 2014 09:18:43 AM Catalin Petrescu
wrote:
Another test we did is to have the xr as a receiver , the
p2mp tunnel is building , but as you said no LSP-VIF
interface , thus the rpf check will fail. I never got it
to work as advertised and ended up using mldp.
I know Cisco
Thanks.
Yeah mLDP is nicer for mvpn.
We're playing/experimenting with P2MP tunnels for IPTV and with FRR
protection.
So, what I'm trying to do is map global multicast traffic to P2MP, not
vrf traffic.
I'm not seeing anything going trough.
I wanted to check if anyone has configured this before
Hi,
I think you are referring to this test
http://www.eantc.de/fileadmin/eantc/downloads/events/2011-2015/MPLSEWC2013/EANTC-MPLSEWC2013-WhitePaper-5.1.pdf
, page 12 goes into detail about the issues and fixes. For 1st problem
this is fixed on jnp with mvpn-iana-rt-import. Need to load up the lab
On Wednesday, July 02, 2014 10:42:29 AM Cydon Satyr wrote:
Yeah mLDP is nicer for mvpn.
We're playing/experimenting with P2MP tunnels for IPTV
and with FRR protection.
I originally used p2mp RSVP-TE for IPTv, but I'm also
comfortable using mLDP for IPTv as well.
There is work ongoing to add
On Wednesday, July 02, 2014 10:47:14 AM Catalin Petrescu
wrote:
I think you are referring to this test
http://www.eantc.de/fileadmin/eantc/downloads/events/2011
-2015/MPLSEWC2013/EANTC-MPLSEWC2013-WhitePaper-5.1.pdf ,
No, not that test. The test I'm talking about is in a live
operator.
But
On Jul 1, 2014, at 2:53 PM, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
I remember this was happening on IOS XR in 3.9 and 4.0.x,
when Ethernet ports were looped for testing, and after the
loop is cleared, DAD keeps IPv6 from working until manual
intervention or a reboot.
Had the same
El 02/07/14 08:59, Elizabeth Millan Castaño escribió:
Cordial Saludo,
I have the following problem in a Cisco ASR9K. I need to limit BW of
an interface Bundle-Ethernet to 1075Mbps. This Bundle is a LACP made
with two giga-ethernet interfaces. I've applied a policy-map with rate
1075Mbps.
You may want to use percentage based policing on bundle-ethernet interfaces as
it will avoid this particular warning/defect.
- Jared
On Jul 2, 2014, at 10:18 AM, Elizabeth Millan Castaño
emil...@mediacommerce.net.co wrote:
El 02/07/14 08:59, Elizabeth Millan Castaño escribió:
Cordial
Anybody using the ME1200 ? I was unable to get into my temp loaner in my
lab and tried to break into it. I was able to but now I've somehow got it
stuck in some lower level boot prompt. Anybody know how to tell it to load
IOS and skip configuration file ?
Aaron
RedBoot help
Manage
When you do a show bundle-ether 2 does the output say both members are in
an active state?
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:IOS-XR-2#show int bundle-ether 2
..
..
No. of members in this bundle: 2
GigabitEthernet0/0/0/1 Full-duplex 1000Mb/s Active
GigabitEthernet0/1/0/1 Full-duplex
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 08:46:11AM -0600, Scott Miller wrote:
When you do a show bundle-ether 2 does the output say both members are in
an active state?
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:IOS-XR-2#show int bundle-ether 2
..
..
No. of members in this bundle: 2
GigabitEthernet0/0/0/1 Full-duplex
When you do a show bundle-ether 2 this is the output. Thanks.
#sh interfaces bundle-ether 2
Wed Jul 2 09:50:33.419 gmt
Bundle-Ether2 is up, line protocol is up
Interface state transitions: 3
MTU 9216 bytes, BW 200 Kbit (Max: 200 Kbit)
reliability 255/255, txload 11/255, rxload
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Multiple Vulnerabilities in Cisco Unified Communications Domain Manager
Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20140702-cucdm
Revision 1.0
For Public Release 2014 July 2 16:00 UTC (GMT
Anyone out there had to certify their network or another network for MEF CE
1.0/2.0 ?
My company wants me to get our network svc's certified. I've already had
the initial phone con with MEF and the subsequent phone con with MEF's 3rd
party testing facility (Iometrix) and am moving forward
One final reply on this. All works if you setup everything as described in
the link you provided Ulrik. The issue we had was caused by the remote side
of the IPsec tunnel ACL not allowing access for the VPN clients IP block.
Thanks again.
-Lee
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Lee Starnes
17 matches
Mail list logo
