Glenn Tan wrote:
Hi
I am having a strange problem here...
We're trying to connect to an uplink's Catalyst 3750 from one of our
6509 SUP720s via 1000base-LX over single-mode fiber and we are having
this weird problem where our router shows the interface as down/down,
whereas their router
WS-SUP720 Catalyst 6500 / Cisco 7600 Supervisor 720 Fabric MSFC3 PFC3A 1
PFC-3A is End-of-line, buggy and the same price as a -3B
Do NOT buy a -3A
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
chiel wrote:
Not anybody who knows why the last part keeps changing?
Please help, I can't found out anymore!
That's just the way it works. You can't do anything about it, other than
use more intelligent software that knows how to deal with tables whose
index change (e.g. cacti).
Toomey, Brian wrote:
Have you tried using 'snmp-server ifindex persist'? It locks the index
values through a reboot.
Yeah, sure. Of ifindices.
The indices of the table in questions are ENTITY-MIB entPhysicalIndex
values and though they'll probably stay constant on a given box *WILL*
vary
Ian MacKinnon wrote:
Hi All,
More stupid questions to keep you busy.
Cisco Optimized ACL logging, what is it good for?
If you have an ACL ACE with a log action set, with lots of pps hitting
it, the OAL buffer (to my understanding) absorbs duplicate hits in
*hardware* before they are
Primoz Jeroncic wrote:
Hi everyone
I'm sorry since this post is not Cisco related, but I hope someone
might still have some usefull suggestions.
I'm trying to find l3 switch capable of MPLS. Unfortunately
for some of our PE locations switches like cat6500 or c3750 metro
our way way too
saso pirnat wrote:
Does anybody knows why i can't get line protocol up with sfp GLC-T on
cisco7609 WS-SUP720-3BXL and line card WS-X6748-SFP when I try to
Those linecards are gig only. You'd need a 6748-TX to go 10/100.
Sorry
___
cisco-nsp mailing
Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists wrote:
You're saying that gateways with proxy arp enabled will
respond to ARP requests when the target IP is INSIDE the
subnet?
That only happens when you have 'ip local-proxy-arp' configured.
It should be apparent that's not the case, or nothing would
work on
Justin Shore wrote:
Phil Mayers wrote:
It's all good up until this point. The g-arp that Vista sends uses a
BS MAC (a multi-cast MAC no less) for the THA (target hardware
address). It
That's odd.
uses 0.0.0.0 for the SPA (source protocol address). Herein lies the
That's normal
Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 01:33:21PM -0700, Kevin Graham wrote:
If you are wiping them out, you should always remove them to be safe
(even if weren't default-deny behavior when missing, there is an
unavoidable window between creation and completion).
Just to correct
Tauren Mills wrote:
Phil,
Thanks for the suggestion. However, changing the arp timeout to 300
doesn't seem to have helped.
Hmm. Re-reading your email, it doesn't sound like that was the problem
anyway.
Can you supply more detail on the physical topo? Does the router hang
off the switch
On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 11:35 +0200, Koen wrote:
Hello list,
I have the following issue with a 7600/WS-SUP720-3BXL (12.2(33)SRA3).
I only see hits on the ingress flow-sampler map and no hits on the
egress map?
I have configured netflow like this:
My understanding was that egress netflow
On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 10:24 -0400, Jeff Fitzwater wrote:
New to list...
Could anyone on this list help with the correct config for NETFLOW
EXPORT for version 9 on a CISCO 6500 with SUP-720-3B running 12.2.18-SXF.
We are trying to export the flows to a QRadar device but the date
Paul Schopis wrote:
Siva, What I am referring to is a hardware limitation on the switch
that does not allow one to set a proper burst size for above a
certain rate-limit threshold. Off the top of my head it was ~30 Mbps.
So anything below that is probably OK. There is a brief description
at
Mark Zipp wrote:
Hi,
I'm wondering if anybody has an update or any fresher opinions on the
the following thread, regarding having to try to synchronise MST VLAN
additions/removes on multiple devices at once to try to avoid
impacting traffic forwarding for existing VLANs. We're about to face
On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 09:14 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello.
We plan to re-deisgn our Lan. The main question is should we now use Layer
3 at the access ?
One major concern with L3 at the access is what class of device you can
afford at the access layer and, if your access layer
On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 10:43 +0530, Vikas Sharma wrote:
Hi,
Need help to understand the concept of multicast?
My question is what is the mac address, when a packet is forwarded across
the WAN? Is it the mac address of connected router (unicast mac address) or
multicast mac-address? When L2
On Fri, 2007-06-29 at 06:06 -0500, Swaroop Potdar wrote:
Most WAN media types are P2P in nature so there is no Multicast to MAC
mapping.
Well yes, but since the OP mentioned multicast MAC addresses, it was a
pretty safe bet to assume he was talking about Ethernet
Since ethernet is a
On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 02:14 -0400, Jared Mauch wrote:
On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 07:59:40AM +0200, Garry wrote:
Hi,
we will be required to go through some larger number of router rollout
soon, I was wondering if there are any tools available to automate this?
I will building some config
On Tue, 2007-07-03 at 17:55 -0700, Kevin Graham wrote:
Or more generally still, just NETCONF. Hopefully it
Isn't the CCE a netconf proxy in effect?
will eventually kill the stupid templates we all have
floating around in some form or another:
On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 15:58 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ok my ospf coverge in 1-2 seconds in case of fiber cut ot upluging
cable , ldp too but when i go and make redundancy force-switchover
OSPF shouldn't have to converge at all using NSF.
LDP is not SSO-aware in the 12.2SX code. You
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 12:32 -0400, Murali Krishna wrote:
But these meesages are in the router log and I need to see other log
messages like interface up/down, is there any command to disable BGP updates
in the log?
As you have been told, one of
no debug all
no debug bgp all
The logs messages
We've got a lot of winXP boxes on-net which join the UPnP groups and the
multicast routing table is filled with useless entries.
Given that we don't have access lists at layer2, what is the best way of
preventing out routers:
a. processing the IGMP joins
b. forwarding the packets
The network
Beware that using SNMP to actually *configure* has some caveats; in
particular, on 6500s using SSO, config changes made via SNMP are not
mirrored to the standby supervisor (I presume this is still true on
latest SXF - was on earlier SXF)
I've been asked about this off-list, so the relevant
On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 15:54 +0200, Lars Fenneberg wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm currently reading the release notes fuer 12.2SX and under the section
Unsupported Features and Commands IPv6 und OSPFv3 are listed as
unsupported. But I see them in the CLI and can also configure them. So what
The
On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 17:28 +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 04:08:43PM +0100, Phil Mayers wrote:
IPv6 is slated for full support on modular releases on SXH
Cool. What about MPLS?
I was told that there would only be modular SXH - no monolithic (you can
still run
On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 23:06 -0400, Jeff Kell wrote:
Is there a quick way to determine if a switch has VRFs enabled via SNMP?
We have some network monitoring/manipulation procedures that get
broken when VRFs are enabled. Logging into the CLI and doing a 'show
ip vrf' does the trick, but I
On Thu, 2007-08-23 at 14:53 +0100, Ian MacKinnon wrote:
Hi All,
Is there any way of using keys on routers so that a copy run scp: will
use them?
Then I don't need the password but can use a public key
Unfortunately not.
___
cisco-nsp mailing
On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 09:33 +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 02:14:56PM -0500, Zhao, Wenmei (Sarah) wrote:
I have a MultiLinkPPP session up. Everything is working,
traffic is flowing and I am able to ping the remote side of the link,
If you have anti-spoofing
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 10:52 +0200, Gier, Menno de (Menno) wrote:
All,
Between two routers I configured BGP for peering. Both routers are not
directly connected, but via a L2 switch.
To make the switch-over faster I use bfd (Bidirectional Forwarding
Detection) (The timers are set to
Question: Is there a control that prevents flooding on Vlan XXX at
Layer2 to prevent devices in the same Vlan from getting overloaded
(bit-bucket'd)
Yes, IGMP snooping.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
On Mon, 2007-09-10 at 16:19 +0300, Michail Litvak wrote:
Hi All,
I have 6506 with sup720bxl3, and configure bridge between two SVI.
bridge irb
!
interface Vlan60
no ip address
bridge-group 2
bridge-group 2 spanning-disabled
!
interface Vlan61
no ip address
bridge-group 2
All,
We had an outage yesterday and initial analysis looks like a SUP going
bad. I've currently got the card in the spare chassis running
diagnostics and this has reminded me I've got some questions about GOLD
that I've never had answered (Cisco: the IOS docs for GOLD in 12.2SX are
awful)
1.
On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 14:33 +0200, Vincent De Keyzer wrote:
Hello,
is there a way to specify the mask information when querying a router's IP
routing table via SNMP ?
My problem is that
snmpwalk -c community -v 2c router ipRouteIfIndex.10.0.0.0
only returns the
On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 08:54 -0700, matthew zeier wrote:
So I wonder if there's an alternative method to prevent over saturation
(or at least reduce it's impact on everyone else)...
It's a layer8 solution, but we've had good luck with bandwidth quotas.
Use netflow to account per-IP, and kick
On Fri, 2007-09-14 at 11:59 +0100, Harkins, Darren wrote:
Has anyone had experience using draft Rosen M-VPN, using GRE tunnels
and/or IP encapsulation, on Cisco (and cross vendor - gin-fixated!)
boxes? (Current mix of 7200 and 6500 + and M7i or two)
Yes, on 6500s. It just works (tm).
HOWEVER:
On Fri, Sep 14, 2007 at 02:51:39PM -0400, Harold Ritter (hritter) wrote:
Phil,
Just a clarification. The interop issue only comes into play if you run
SSM in the P domain. There is no interop issue if ASM is used in the P
domain.
Yes sorry; obviously using ASM one can discover via the (*,g)
On Sun, 2007-09-16 at 08:46 +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 15, 2007 at 05:28:35PM -0500, mack wrote:
Does anyone have a tentative release date for 12.2(33)SXH1?
I haven't, sorry. But you have made me curious - anything wrong with SXH
that we should be aware of? (There must
All,
I recently discovered the quite comprehensive coverage of both the
entPhysicalTable and CISCO-ENTITY-SENSOR mib. In particular, a vast
array of the sensors on our 6500s are exposed through it...
...but only on the 4.4 hw revision. The newer sups, on 5.4 hw revision,
appear to omit a whole
On Mon, 2007-09-17 at 22:47 -0500, Justin Shore wrote:
I've got a pair of each. The ME6524 has been a pretty good router for
us so far, other than the lack of L2TP support and no GRE in hardware.
Interesting. The sup720 does GRE in hardware, modulo a few limitations.
Why doesn't the 6524?
Bah. 2 out of 9 two boxes, we decide to get vendor rather than TAC
maintenance, and it all goes wrong... I wonder if it's encoded in the
backplane PROM ;o)
Whilst I'm waiting for my reseller to embarass themselves; we have the
following setup:
core1 [Te1/1] --- [Te1/1] core2
[Te1/3]
On Wed, 2007-09-19 at 18:22 -0700, Sukumar Subburayan (sukumars) wrote:
Phil,
Other than CDP, are you able to ping new-1/2, from core1/core2 to the
directly connected Ten1/1 on new/1/2?
Yep; ping, ospf, ldp and BGP peerings (core1 and core2 are route
reflectors) all come up fine; new-1/2 are
On Thu, 2007-09-20 at 11:23 +0200, Karol Mares wrote:
Hi,
On 9/20/07, Nick Kraal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear all,
We are setting up tunnels within our network, and are using some
previous documented configurations for this. We will use this to enable
virtual P2P BGP sessions to
On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 01:48 -0400, Robert Boyle wrote:
A little while ago someone asked if anyone was running SXH in
production yet. There weren't any positive responses other than a few
people stating they were testing it. Has anyone taken the next step
yet? I'm interested in BGP, ISIS,
Agreed, what is so difficult about 1U plus dual power and 48 ports?
That it would undercut several of their other products.
For a data centre where you might have dozens of these, it is essential.
We use Allied Telesyn switches, as their 8948 is a 1U box with dual
power for a
Cisco should make at least one 1U 24 port GigE switch with real dual
power built into the chassis for under $1000 street price or bring
back a real RPS. I don't need L3 features for most applications.
That's where our 6500s come in. We just need a switch for customer
server setups in our
On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 11:12 +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 10:01:27AM +0100, Phil Mayers wrote:
They're not stupid.
Regarding the design of the RPS-675, I challenge that statement.
Hoho! I should re-phrase:
Cisco have a good grasp of the monetary aspects
On Tue, 2007-10-02 at 11:11 +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 09:53:12AM +0100, Phil Mayers wrote:
You are aware that SXH is only available in modular?
That's news to me and my routers :)
-rw-r--r-- 1 gert daemon 77939716 11 Sep 10:26
s72033
On Sun, 2007-10-07 at 00:03 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have looked into this section, however i am not clear about the local
switching ?? does the local switching relates to traffic that stays
within this line card or goes across the switch fabric ??
Withing the card, obviously
On Mon, 2007-10-15 at 20:02 -0500, Matthew Simpson wrote:
Dear list,
I'm trying to allow access to a private IP numbered area of my network
to Windows clients using PPTP VPN on a 6509 router. I have set up the
I would be *very* surprised if this works properly.
Use a separate VPN server
On Mon, 2007-10-22 at 11:17 +0200, Oliver, Rod wrote:
Hi All,
I'm working on a project with which requires a deployment of MVPNs. We
are struggling with whether or not we need to upgrade the PE and route
reflectors in order to support the MDT SAFI.
In the lab we can make things work both
On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 10:10 +0100, Ian MacKinnon wrote:
Hi All,
I am trying to create some vlans on a 6500 Sup32 running 12.2SXH
When I try and create vlan 1010 and give it a name I get an error.
eg
conf t
vlan 1010
name myname
Gives
%Failed to commit extended VLAN(s) changes.
That said, I do feel that tying BFD to routing protocol events only
is a bit shortsighted - why not have an option to just change line
protocol to down in a case of BFD timeout failure, and let the
routing protocols react the that naturally?
Surely this wouldn't work on
Is there a HSRP option to tell the standby router to only route traffic
when it's active? VRRP and GLBP would have the same problem I imagine.
No. This is a frequently requested feature.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 13:08 -0500, Justin Shore wrote:
Phil Mayers wrote:
Is there a HSRP option to tell the standby router to only route traffic
when it's active? VRRP and GLBP would have the same problem I imagine.
No. This is a frequently requested feature.
I think I'll ping my
I'm specifically talking about upstream traffic from the client, not
downstream from the HSRP routers. Downstream will always flow out the
active as expected.
Not always. The HSRP standby has an active connected route for the
subnet and will (may) export it via a routing protocol, so the
On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 12:10 -0800, Christopher E. Brown wrote:
Phil Mayers wrote:
On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 13:08 -0500, Justin Shore wrote:
Phil Mayers wrote:
Is there a HSRP option to tell the standby router to only route traffic
when it's active? VRRP and GLBP would have the same problem
On Sat, 2007-10-27 at 18:02 +0300, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote:
One ugly way to do it would be to create an eem applet on both routers which
would do the following:
1) watch for syslog messages STANDBY Active-xxx and then decrease
the metric of these
redistributed connected routes
On Sun, 2007-10-28 at 17:50 +0200, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote:
To make it even uglier, you can configure (using eem again) pbr under the
upstream interface to send
all these requests to the appropriate router, bypassing the connected routes.
There are lots of things I could do, that for
On Sat, 2007-10-27 at 14:12 -0800, Christopher E. Brown wrote:
Phil Mayers wrote:
On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 12:10 -0800, Christopher E. Brown wrote:
Phil Mayers wrote:
On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 13:08 -0500, Justin Shore wrote:
Phil Mayers wrote:
Is there a HSRP option to tell the standby router
The simple low overhead fix would be to have the HSRP master send a
*single* extra packet every X seconds. Just one gratuitous ARP every
200 seconds would solve the whole issue.
See my other email; in our network (6500/sup720) the HSRP master *DOES*
send frequent packets with the vmac as a
On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 12:31 +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello list .
Has anyone ever encountered a bug on a 6509 using 6704-10GE and Sup 720
3BXL.
We are running 12.2(18)SXF8 on it on both 10GE linecards went down on the
same time this morning hereWe had to
On Tue, 2007-11-06 at 10:33 -0500, Phil Bedard wrote:
I saw a presentation on it some time ago and it looked very cool.
As did I, but what wasn't made clear at the time was that all the
linecards would need to be upgraded to DFC3C. In fact, I seem to recall
being *explicitly* told that only the
On Tue, 2007-11-06 at 19:39 +0100, Daniel Dib wrote:
Hey Michael.
Here is something you can try out. Instead of using CoPP to limit ARP use
the hardwarebased ratelimiters.
mls rate-limit unicast cef glean 2 60 - This limits the number of
ARP-packets punted to the RP of the type
On Fri, 2007-11-09 at 13:44 +0100, Daniel Dib wrote:
Citerar Saku Ytti [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On (2007-11-08 10:18 +), Phil Mayers wrote:
mls qos protocol arp police 10 pps per-mac
A single host can kick out thousands of ARP requests/sec and thus
trigger the rate limiter which
On Mon, 2007-11-12 at 11:58 +0200, Pavel Gulchouck wrote:
Hi
How can I configure HSRP with two routers and track condition
if I want that IGP (OSPF) always route to active (not standby)
gateway?
Very difficult. The only realistic solution I have seen is a route map
on the redistribute
On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 14:58 +0100, saso pirnat wrote:
I'm experiencing problems that are seen specialy on multicast traffic
(about 200Mb/s) on one of our 7609-2SUP720XL-2PS with WS-SUP720-3BXL and
WS-X6748-SFP line card running s72033-adventerprisek9_wan-mz.122-18.SXF8
due high CPU utilization
Ivan Gasparik wrote:
you can decrease the SP load by adding a DFC's to your line cards. DFC
will do gathering statistics from forwarding hardware and populating
netflow entries in netflow cache. all this is load caused by
interrupts as you can see it now in SP CPU utilization.
SP will then
Justin M. Streiner wrote:
Does anyone have an OID to:
1. enumerate the VLANs configured in a vlan-group to be presented to an
FWSM in a 6500 via the firewall vlan-group command?
I've searched the MIBs using many different combinations of vlan,
firewall, channel, etc, but have come up with
On Sun, Dec 09, 2007 at 07:56:32AM +0200, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
I have reviewed:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/routers/ps368/prod_bulletin0900aecd805df25d.html
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps708/prod_bulletin0900aecd80628341.html
but am looking for a Cisco page that
Drew Weaver wrote:
Does anyone know if there is a way to do per vlan configuration of
the IP helper commands via SNMP, we would like to only have it
enabled when systems need to be pxe-booted, although I suppose we
could always have it enabled and control whether or not the system
pxeboots
Michael Robson wrote:
The servertech PT45 has all you need below is link to
details. There power relays can go up to 20A as far as I know.
They provide out of band access via dialup and can give
console access and power management.
Nicolas DEFFAYET wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 11:28 +0100, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 09:59:21AM +0100, Mohacsi Janos wrote:
We are using Sup32 with 12.2(18)SXF11 for more than 2.5 months without a
problem (Earlier we used 12.2(18)SXF10) - of course without full
Checking my own MLS NDE configurations, it looks very similar - *but*
I am not exporting to a VRF. So a possible issue could be that the PFC
export isn't VRF capable.
It isn't. Annoyingly.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Brandon Price wrote:
Thanks for the reply!!
Please don't remove the list from the Cc: - the replies in the archived
may help others
From the link you sent:
The vlan dot1q tag native command is a global command that configures
the switch to tag
native VLAN traffic, and admit only 802.1Q
Kristian Larsson wrote:
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 10:53:49PM +, Phil Mayers wrote:
Brandon Price wrote:
Thanks for the reply!!
Please don't remove the list from the Cc: - the replies in the archived
may help others
From the link you sent:
The vlan dot1q tag native command is a global
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, February 3, 2008 4:06 pm, Phil Mayers wrote:
Checking my own MLS NDE configurations, it looks very similar - *but*
I am not exporting to a VRF. So a possible issue could be that the PFC
export isn't VRF capable.
It isn't. Annoyingly.
Hello all
Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 03:43:20PM -0500, Aaron wrote:
BFD has is place with ethernet through a switch, I don't see its value in
anything else. You can have fast detection without BFD.
Well, the nice thing about IOS is that things are configurable. We have
now
This to me suggests that hardware forwarding is broken (I assume the log
option causes punting to the CPU which allows the traffic to flow).
Sounds like it.
Has this worked on a previous release of the software?
What is the config for the tunnel interface?
Drew Weaver wrote:
This may sound like an odd question, but I was just curious if there
is any way to adjust the administrative distance for 'connected'?
No.
I'm trying to make it impossible for hosts whom are 'blackholed' to
even send traffic to their 'default gateway' or hosts whom are
Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote:
I think i haven't made it clear enough
Let's suppose i have the following 2 systems:
6500/SUP720-3BXL
6724-SFP (DFC-3CXL)
6500/SUP720-3BXL
6724-SFP (DFC-3BXL)
If i'm not mistaken both will operate in 3BXL mode, so what is the
disadvantage of the
Darryl Dunkin wrote:
If you're using /32 masks for your loopbacks (as you should):
router ospf
redistribute connected subnets
The key part is to define 'subnets'.
My personal preference has been to allocate router loopbacks *and* p2p
IPs out of a cidr block and use a network
Mark Tinka wrote:
On Wednesday 27 February 2008, Darryl Dunkin wrote:
If you're using /32 masks for your loopbacks (as you
should): router ospf
redistribute connected subnets
The key part is to define 'subnets'.
I'd advise against using 'redistribute' to announce any kind
of
Mark Tinka wrote:
On Wednesday 27 February 2008, Phil Mayers wrote:
I think that's probably a bit dramatic (no offence
intended). We've used redis connected / static for
customer routes (edge networks) for quite a while now
here with no problesm; initially in a VRF-lite model:
If you
Munroe, James (DSS/MAS) wrote:
Hello,
Anyone have any experience configuring etherchannel bundles across
multiple, different linecards on a Cisco 6509 IOS based switch? For
example we have a client who would like to have 3 x 1GE copper ports on
a WS-X6748-GE-TX linecard and 1 x 1GE SX
Wyatt Mattias Ishmael Jovial Gyllenvarg wrote:
Hi All
Why is it that when you restart a 7600 or 6500 the route-reflector
client statment is erased from the config?
Highly frustrating feature too troubleshoot over the phone
Anyone else have this?
No. It works fine in our config.
Justin Shore wrote:
Jeff Kell wrote:
Justin Shore wrote:
Personally I'm still using ACLs on my border routers. At this point
in time I want the ACE hit counters for those rogue packets
Hrmmm... will these show up in netflow in some identifiable fashion?
That's a good question. I'm not
Robert Hass wrote:
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 1:41 PM, Fredrik Jacobsson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to test upgrade procedures in the lab, but unfortunatly I
only have 12.2(33)SXH1 to play with. The plain 12.2(33)SXH release is
unusable..
And what is wrong with SXH1 ? We're using
Peter Rathlev wrote:
Hi Neil,
Thanks, but that was exactly what I was trying to avoid: Having to
configure (conf t) the box every time I need to view something a
little more exotic than just prefixes with this community. But I guess
there's no way around at the moment. :-)
You could have a
Drew Weaver wrote:
What are some persistent things about Cisco products that no matter
how high into the product line you travel you cannot get away from? I
* Slow bootup - in some cases, prohibitively so
* Relatively slow CPUs e.g. 600MHz on 6500 - maybe not universal, but
certainly
Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 08:47:18PM -0400, Fred Reimer wrote:
I believe it is on by default because it has to be.
because it has to be? What sort of brainwashed crap is that?
It's on because someone in the past thought it might be a good idea (and
when I was
Bill Nash wrote:
Find the ifIndex for the one interface, and instead of doing a table walk,
just append that ifIndex to whichever interface object you're polling and
do simple gets.
ifDescr.6
ifOperStatus.6
ifAdminStatus.6
etc.
I don't think that's what the OP wants; I think they want
Whisper wrote:
Stop complaining
If Cisco did everthing for us, none of us would have jobs, right?
Speak for yourself.
A large portion of the crap that needs doing in IT (not just networking)
could have and should have been automated below the threshold of human
visibility decades ago. As
Anders Marius Jørgensen (lists) wrote:
Hi Robert,
I'm currently looking for some software which can help us test new
Multicast configuration
in our network. Is any free software which can send multicast stream
(video,music,whatever)
and some receiver/client software ? (best if
Nate wrote:
I'm trying to put together a table of advantages (and disadvantages)
of a vlan interface (SVI) vs. a sub-interface of a physical port. So
far, I have the following.
Assuming you are talking about layer3 routed interfaces, then basically;
* On platforms that support SVIs, you
Ramcharan, Vijay A wrote:
I am about to open a case with TAC regarding feasibility of using either
SPAN or VACL capture or some other method of capturing traffic exceeding
1Gbps.
I am not even sure if it is possible to send this much captured traffic
to a 10Gbps port connected to something
That's what you want - we have this on our 6500s:
int vlanX
mtu 9212
ip mtu 9100
mpls ip
Ok, so ip mtu will influence OSPF but not MPLS? That would be fine
for me (at the moment).
Yep
___
cisco-nsp mailing list
Stephen Fulton wrote:
Gert,
FWIW, I spent a lot of time researching the 6500/7600 BU issue in
preparation for our last round of upgrades. The best (and most honest)
answer I got about service provider software features on the 6500 series
was this: We'll still support MPLS, IPv6 etc,
Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists wrote:
OTOH, 6500 gets software modularity, which is something that
we consider a *real* must for any decent high-availability
environment.
So, does anyone think IOS XE looks cool? Say, ISSU on a single
hardware RP, for example. Well, I do. And it's from the same BU
Dean Smith wrote:
We can't moan about IOS deficienciesand also moan when Cisco take the
opportunity of fundamentally new hardware to fundamentally re-architect the
software to fix those problems.
You've completely mis-understood what I said.
I like many I suspect have been suffering
1 - 100 of 1320 matches
Mail list logo
