Re: [c-nsp] NCS IOS-XR rant (was:Re: Internet border router recommendations and experiences)

--- Original Message --- On Saturday, March 4th, 2023 at 16:38, Tarko Tikan wrote: > > hey, Yo, > > "ztp initiate dataport" > > > We were discussing iPXE and not normal ZTP. iPXE is only possible via > OOB management port and allows software install via DHCP options, normal > ZTP will

Re: [c-nsp] NCS IOS-XR rant (was:Re: Internet border router recommendations and experiences)

--- Original Message --- On Wednesday, March 1st, 2023 at 09:43, Tarko Tikan via cisco-nsp wrote: > > My long-term solution to this problem is to install with iPXE. That lets > > you do it via HTTP and without all the nonsense :) > > > Unfortunately this is only possible via OOB

Re: [c-nsp] NCS-5501 - EVPN L2VPN BVI mac-address weirdness

Hi Drikus, Did you ever resolve this? We saw issues with MAC addresses on NCS55K too, but not related to EVPN. For example, one can use the commands 'interface foo; mac .." to set a custom MAC on a physical interface, XR commits the config but on these Broadcom chips it doesn't

Re: [c-nsp] TIL: Maintenance Operations Protocol (MOP)

On Thu, 5 Aug 2021 at 22:47, Lukas Tribus wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Aug 2021 at 21:49, Nick Hilliard wrote: > > It has the appearance of a feature which is kept alive because some > > customer with a huge spend demands it in general-deployment release > > trains (this is idle speculation and may be

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9K using XR 7

We've been testing 7.1.3 for deployment onto ASR9Ks and NCS55Ks. Similar features set to you it sounds, the standard SP features. No show stoppers on the 9Ks for us in 7.1.3 but I think a few on the NCS55ks. There are always plenty of bugs on XR, and they are different on ASR9Ks and NCS55ks.

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus Architecture question

On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 at 21:37, Drew Weaver wrote: > Not sure how that would've gotten through QA but I am glad it was finally > fixed in newer hardware. You assume there was any QA. Cheers, James. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9K to ASR920 MPLS issue

On Wed, 6 Jan 2021 at 18:47, Jerry Bacon wrote: > > This is exactly what I started with, but it didn't work, which is why I > tried some other things. I have reverted to this configuration. > > Can I omit the "rewrite ..." on both sides? Why would you want to? I think that if you do that, a VLAN

Re: [c-nsp] route leak from main to vrf

On Fri, 8 Jan 2021 at 10:44, BASSAGET Cédric wrote: > > Hello, > I'm trying to leak routes from my main routing table to a VRF. > > Using Cisco IOS XE Software, Version 16.09.05 on a ASR1001-X > > I've done this config : > > ip prefix-list BT_LNS-out seq 5 permit x.x.x.3/32 > ip prefix-list

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9K to ASR920 MPLS issue

Hi Jerry, I would update the config as follows (if you're just doing a basic P2P pseudowire, go for the KISS approach): > ASR9K: interface TenGigE0/0/1/0.95 l2transport encapsulation dot1q 95 rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric mtu 9118! Needs to be +14 for Ethernet +4 for VLAN tag on

Re: [c-nsp] me3600 : l2protocol forward stp on EVC

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 10:39, BASSAGET Cédric wrote: > > Hello, > > I need to interconnect two L2 domains. I was planning to use a me3600 for > this : > > interface port-channel 1 > ... > service instance 1439 ethernet > encapsulation dot1q 1439 second-dot1q 1-4094 > rewrite ingress tag pop 1

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco life cycle strategy

On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 at 20:23, harbor235 wrote: > > Hello, > > What is your replacement strategy for Cisco gear reaching EOL milestones? > > I prefer not to replace at the end of SW maintenance releases but prefer > the end of vulnerability/Security support. My assumption is by then all the >

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9001 and Snmp

On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 at 08:23, Olivier CALVANO wrote: > > Hi > > I can't get the snmp to work on my cisco ASR9000 to monitor it with > Centreon. > > i use this configuration: > > snmp-server ifindex persist > snmp-server trap-source Loopback0 > > snmp-server view public system included >

Re: [c-nsp] Mass-renaming interfaces

On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 07:35, Eugene Grosbein wrote: > > Hi! > > One of my 7201 routers has four GigabitEthernet interfaces but uses only two, > one for IP uplink and another as client-sided downlink with multiple > sub-interfaces named like GigabitEthernet0/1.10 (encapsulation dot1Q). > > It

Re: [c-nsp] asr920 - pppoe - Filter-Id is fail

On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 at 20:29, Mike wrote: > > Hi, > > I got another one - > > Playing with my asr920 I have it working as a pppoe server. I notice > that if I have a radius attribute returned "Filter-Id" with the name of > a filter already on the box, the pppoe session doesn't come up and

Re: [c-nsp] XR6 process conflicts

On 15 September 2020 10:17:09 CEST, "t...@pelican.org" wrote: >On Monday, 14 September, 2020 19:38, "Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN" > said: > >> On Sat, Sep 12, 2020, at 11:25, James Bensley wrote: >> >>> In your specific case/example; if I have a

Re: [c-nsp] XR6 process conflicts

On 13 September 2020 05:37:11 CEST, aar...@gvtc.com wrote: >Hi James, I'm coming into this conversation late or mid-point, but as a >thought, if 1 of those 500 routers goes down, you need to know about >that >individual router's ospf state dropping. How else would you know that >unless you

Re: [c-nsp] XR6 process conflicts

On Sun, 6 Sep 2020 at 10:22, nivalMcNd d wrote: > > Hi all, Hi Nival, Can I ask, as you seem disappointed by what you have found; what were you hoping to find? XR is a proprietary product, the design of which has had almost zero input from the majority of its users. In your specific

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco VRF/BGP in Radius

On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 at 08:24, Olivier CALVANO wrote: > is it possible to send BGP type information by radius to the Cisco PE > router? Hi Oliver, what do you mean by BGP type? > I know that we can say that a connection must be attached to a vrf, but can > we make this vrf be created by the

Re: [c-nsp] suggestions for ASR1001-x stable IOS-XE release as lac/lns?

On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 14:22, Gaël Garcin wrote: > > Hello, > > I would suggest 16.09.04 or above in 16.09.x, using it for 1 year as LNS > without issue. > > Best regards, > Gaël +1 for 16.9.4. We have rigorously tested 16.9.4 on ASR1009-X's as LNS devices. It's been rock solid apart from one

Re: [c-nsp] ASR920 LACP and xconnect

On Thu, 20 Aug 2020 at 19:16, Eric Van Tol wrote: > Interface configs: > > interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0 > mtu 1600 > no ip address > load-interval 30 > negotiation auto > channel-group 1 mode active > ! > > interface GigabitEthernet0/0/1 > mtu 1600 > no ip address > load-interval 30 >

Re: [c-nsp] BGP - advertising default route to Branch offices

On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 at 01:24, Yham wrote: > > Hello Gentlemen, There's really no need to exclude women is there? > Can anyone please tell which is considered a best practice when it comes to > the advertising default route? If any vendor documentation addresses this, > please feel free to

Re: [c-nsp] BGP Multipath

On Thu, 13 Aug 2020 at 00:56, Yham wrote: > > Hello Gentlemen, There are women on this list too. > Router A and B are iBGP > neigbors in ASN100 and a prefix 10.0.0.0/8 attache to both. Router C and D > are iBGP neighbors in ASN100. Router A has an eBGP with Router C and Router > B has an eBGP

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco N540-ACC-SYS ipv4 routes

On Tue, 14 Jul 2020 at 06:20, Saku Ytti wrote: > > On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 at 20:39, James Bensley > wrote: > > > Back in the 7600s it was NPU based, and what we call NPUs today are > > sometimes a collection of ASICs that form a "complex of ASICs". That > >

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco N540-ACC-SYS ipv4 routes

On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 at 09:01, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > On 13/Jul/20 09:20, Saku Ytti wrote: > > > But if that is a strict definition, then we don't really have ASICs > > outside really cheap switches, as there is some programmability in all > > new stuff being released. So I'm not sure what the

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco N540-ACC-SYS ipv4 routes

On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 at 08:27, Saku Ytti wrote: > > On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 at 00:54, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > The general messaging, over the years, has been that ASIC is quick but > > not flexible, while NPU is flexible but can get bogged down by added > > flexibility in time. > > The classical view

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9000 and ssh and "Crypto enginer decrypt failed"

On Wed, 3 Jun 2020 at 14:34, wrote:> I am unable to find this error in Cisco IOS-XR documentation and the > fact that it appeared at the same time in both routers leads me to > suspect that perhaps they were probed by some crafted packet that > caused it so I am wondering whether other IOS-XRs

Re: [c-nsp] ASR920 Interface won't come up

On Tue, 19 May 2020 at 00:22, Shawn L wrote: > > Had another weird interface issue on a pair of Cisco ASR920 routers. > Wondering if anyone has seen something similar before. > > Both are setup with basic routing, no layer-2 functionality over the link, > and pretty basic. > > interface

Re: [c-nsp] C6800 Sup2T buffering ?

On Wed, 20 May 2020 at 21:45, james list wrote: > > Dear experts > my customer have some multicast flows which are detected sometime with > peaks/latency. > > They measure this latency based on protocol financial feed timestamp which > I'm not able to decode (I guess they use stuff like Corvil).

Re: [c-nsp] ospf auto-cost reference-bandwidth on modern gigabit networks

On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 10:13, Saku Ytti wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 11:33, James Bensley > wrote: > > > APE has a wavelength from provider A to P-1 and a 2nd wavelength from > > provider B to P-2. I’ve asked each provider for a 2nd wavelength from > > me

Re: [c-nsp] ospf auto-cost reference-bandwidth on modern gigabit networks

On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 09:58, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > On 30/Apr/20 10:33, James Bensley wrote: > > > Role based and metric based IGP costs are a good idea in theory. They > > are a lot more difficult in practice. Another problem with role based > > IGP costs

Re: [c-nsp] ospf auto-cost reference-bandwidth on modern gigabit networks

On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 at 16:21, Saku Ytti wrote: > > Hey, > > > Is there a recommended 'modern default' for ip ospf auto-cost > > reference-bandwidth, to account for the fact that modern networks have > > 1g and faster interfaces? > > To me this never made any sense. It's a very atypical case

Re: [c-nsp] ospf auto-cost reference-bandwidth on modern gigabit networks

On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 at 16:10, Mike wrote: > > Hello, > > Is there a recommended 'modern default' for ip ospf auto-cost > reference-bandwidth, to account for the fact that modern networks have > 1g and faster interfaces? > > My core equipment all has 10G and 1G interfaces today, and it

Re: [c-nsp] Default Route recalculated every 60 seconds.

On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 at 07:11, Bradley Ordner wrote: > > I am about to leave an Enterprise environment due to Pre Covid-19 redundancy > and I just need to find the root cause of this issue before I leave. > > We recently built a Layer 2 Circuit over a Providers SDN Backbone so we could > get a

Re: [c-nsp] SDx open standard?

On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 at 13:08, Alex K. wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > I was thinking, throughout last design sessions with my customers, those > vendors are really pushing hard for their "SDN something" solutions > adoption. > > SD WAN, SD access, Software defined everything, are all closed

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 8000

On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 at 23:36, James Jun wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 10:59:59PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > > > Have you considered the NCS540? > > > > We did. Two major problems as I've shared on this list before: > > > > ?? - IOS XR > > ?? - Broadcom chipset > > There is a

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 8000

On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 at 21:00, Mark Tinka wrote: > > I'd be curious to know if you've had any operational issues that you > > share with regards to IOS-XR at the access layer, because it's not > > clear to me what you mean by "too heavy". > > RPL is great, but too verbose. IOS XE is not as rich as

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 8000

On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 at 20:55, Mark Tinka wrote: > I don't think the 8000 is part of the NCS family. Ah yeah, sorry, my bad! Cheers, James. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus 7k with F2e line cards and egress queuing

On Sat, 14 Dec 2019 at 16:18, Curtis Piehler wrote: > Has anyone had egress VQ Congestion issues on the Nexus 7k using F2e line > cards causing input discards? There has been intentional influx of traffic > over the past few months to these units (Primarily VoIP traffic) IE: SBCs > and such.

Re: [c-nsp] A9K-RSP-8G to A9K-RSP440-SE

On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 at 18:39, Jason Lixfeld wrote: > > Hi, > > We’ve got a bunch of A9Ks whose RSP-8Gs and last supported XR release (5.3.4) > are both EOS. We’re looking to replace them with A9K-RSP440-SEs to cost > effectively get us by for a few more years. Temporary almost always becomes

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 8000

On Sun, 15 Dec 2019 at 17:20, Mark Tinka wrote: > We are avoiding the NCS520 simply because it's IOS XR (too heavy for an > agile Metro) and it's Broadcom. ... > Conversely, the MX204 makes the most sense to us for high-capacity > deliveries in the Metro: > > - We use it to drive a 100Gbps

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 8000

On Sun, 15 Dec 2019 at 06:55, Mark Tinka wrote: > I quickly notice that the NCS6000 is no longer on that list of "core > routers". > > To be honest, I'm not sure whether I trust Cisco's long-term vision > about their core routers. The CRS-X, which still has plenty of juice, is > being abandoned,

Re: [c-nsp] ASR1000 IOS XE / ISG L2 DHCP subscribers

On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 at 07:18, Mark Tees wrote: > > Hi listers, > > I was wondering if anyone out there has an example config of ISG L2 DHCP > subscribers with AAA controlled VRF membership. Happy to pay for it. > My next step is TAC. > > I have a basic setup working with a dynamic VLAN interface

Re: [c-nsp] Inter-VRF with NAT

On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 00:39, David Prall wrote: > > Have you looked at VASI configuration. > https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/network-address-translation-nat/200255-Configure-VRF-Aware-Software-Infrastruct.html > > David > -- > http://dcp.dcptech.com I'm happy to be wrong here, but

Re: [c-nsp] Inter-VRF with NAT

On 17 August 2019 20:47:28 CEST, Mike wrote: >Hello, > >    I have a group of devices on my network (customer cpe - dsl modems >mostly) which don't have the intelligence necessary to route their >management traffic seperate from the user internet traffic. This means >that packets inbound to

Re: [c-nsp] GTSM IOS-XR

On Tue, 6 Aug 2019 at 18:38, Saku Ytti wrote: > > If you are running GTSM in IOS-XR, it does not work. TTL is verified > during 3-way-sync, not after. So anyone can reset that session with > trivial amount of packets in subsecond. > > Cisco is is having internal problems arguing if this is

Re: [c-nsp] OSPF flapping between Nexus 7000 and ASR 1001x

On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 21:01, wrote: > > Try removing the "ip ospf mtu-ignore" from both ends -see if the adjacency > comes up (past exchange). > Try enabling debug to see what exactly is going on -you should see straight > away what the crux of the problem is. > > adam ^ This. Never use "ip ospf

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9900 - Copy files from USB key

On Sun, 2 Jun 2019 at 18:35, Jared Mauch wrote: > > > > > On Jun 2, 2019, at 3:50 AM, James Bensley > > wrote: > > > > > > I recently upgraded from eXR 6.5.2 to 6.5.3 and pushed the files using > > SCP to the router from a jump box, which was on

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9900 - Copy files from USB key

> > On May 20, 2019, at 11:03 PM, Erik Sundberg wrote: > > > > Little follow up. > > > > On a ASR9906 6.3.3 (32bit) the usb key comes up as usb: but on 6.3.3 > > (64-bit) it's disk2: > > > > > > Copying the 6.3.3 migration files from a USB Key was 182 seconds, with HTTP > > it was around 1

Re: [c-nsp] 6500 series, FIB exception @ dfc

On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 14:28, Drew Weaver wrote: > > Quick related question. > > Can you not reduce the number of MPLS routes on this platform? > > User configured :- > --- > IPv4- 768k > MPLS- 1k > IPv6 + IP multicast - 120k (default) > > Upon

Re: [c-nsp] Seamless MPLS interacting with flat LDP domains

On 6 May 2019 10:12:25 BST, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote: >> Robert Raszuk >> Sent: Friday, May 3, 2019 3:16 AM >> >> Radu, >> >> The MPLS in modern DC is none starter purely from technology pov. >> >> In modern DCs compute nodes are your tenant PEs all talking to rest >of the >> fabric

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco IOS ping utility reports lower RTT than possible

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 at 11:14, Martin T wrote: > > Hi, Hi Martin, > I have a following very simple network topology: > > CISCO1921[Gi0/0] <-> [eno3]svr > > Gi0/0 in Cisco 1921 ISR has 10.66.66.2/24 configured and eno3 in Linux > server has 10.66.66.1/24 configured. RTT on this link is 10ms: How

Re: [c-nsp] Seamless MPLS interacting with flat LDP domains

On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 15:04, wrote: > > So for the ASR920, you get about 20,000 FIB entries. That's what you want > to > > keep your eye on to determine whether you're at a point where you need to > > do this. > > > > Ideally, you would be carrying IGP and LDP in FIB. With BGP-SD, you can > >

Re: [c-nsp] Seamless MPLS interacting with flat LDP domains

On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 at 05:26, Igor Sukhomlinov wrote: > > Hi all, Hi Igor > I wonder if anyone has experience with integrating a UMMT/Seamless > MPLS domain (BGP-LU running over isolated IGP regions) with an > existing flat LDP network. > > The customer wants to make sure the existing LDP

Re: [c-nsp] Pseudowire and load-balancing - revisit

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 at 17:41, wrote: > Interesting point you raised there, > According to > https://community.cisco.com/t5/service-providers-documents/asr9000-xr-load-b > alancing-architecture-and-characteristics/ta-p/3124809#field > ASR9k can parse 0x8847 for entropy MPLS - IP Payload, with < 4

Re: [c-nsp] IS-IS as PE-CE protocol

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 02:31, Victor Sudakov wrote: > > Dear Colleagues, > > OSPF as a PE-CE protocol has some useful features: the "DN bit" for loop > prevention and sham links for route optimization. > > Does IS-IS have similar features? Hi Victor, Someone has already mentioned that IS-IS has

Re: [c-nsp] TCAM utilization on Nexus 9396

On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 at 19:14, Satish Patel wrote: > > Thanks for clarification, i have noticed when i add 1 rules number > bump +1 but i believe you can't go above 510 right? that is hard limit > if i am not wrong. > > also changing in resource required reload. Hi Satish, I don't know this

Re: [c-nsp] Pseudowire and load-balancing - revisit

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 18:19, James Jun wrote: > > Hey all, > > I have a PW scenario that looks like this: > > Customer --- PE1 P [4x10GE LAG] PE2 -- Customer > > PE1, P and PE2 routers are all ASR9K. > > EoMPLS PW is delivered to customer; both PE1 and PE2 configure FAT-PW as >

Re: [c-nsp] QinQ termination on a Catalyst 6800

On Mon, 18 Feb 2019 at 18:14, wrote: > > > Cat6K and 6880 support QinQ. > > We use it to connect some L3 vlans between our DC. > > I’m not at my desk, but from memory, .. > > 1) on the access port facing the ‘client’ …. > > Switchport mode dot1q-tunnel > > switchport access vlan xxx.Where

Re: [c-nsp] segment routing/evpn on ASR920

On 30 January 2019 15:15:02 GMT, Aaron Gould wrote: >I read that SR/SPRING is an alternative to LDP or RSVP... seems that >SR/SPRING is a label distribution protocol. Meaning, in my mind, it's >a way >to learn labels...mpls labels I guess. If so, would we refer to EVPN >as >EVPN-SR? If so,

Re: [c-nsp] segment routing/evpn on ASR920

On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 at 02:36, Tom Ammon wrote: > > Has anybody tried running segment routing on ASR920? If so, did you run in > to any caveats? What about EVPN over segment routing on that platform? The > SR configuration guide for this platform lists segment routing, but doesn't > call out EVPN

Re: [c-nsp] ASR920 is a ticking timebomb (CSCvk35460)

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 at 16:16, David White, Jr. (dwhitejr) via cisco-nsp wrote: > Unfortunately, 'Terminated' in this case has double meanings. It in > fact does mean exactly what you have stated, 'a conscious decision was > made not to fix this bug'. However, it /also/ means 'Unreproducible - >

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco NCS 5500

On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 at 15:00, Friedrich, Gregor wrote: > > Hi Michael, > > P-role is confirmed by the SP BU. PE-role is partly confirmed, depends on > your requirements of VRFs, Routes, Acls, QOS. Scale models are recommended. > > Regards Gregor Hi Gregor, Yes for P role these are good boxes.

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco NCS 5500

On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 at 10:15, Michael Hallgren wrote: > > Hi James, > > Sorry for my lack of precision. PE is what I'm talking about. > > mh Hi Michael, In the past we have used stuff like NCS5501 when we had a long wait time for ASR9001, so an edge PoP / MPLS PE device. This was a managed

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco NCS 5500

On 16 January 2019 09:18:34 GMT, Michael Hallgren wrote: >Hi guys, > >I'm looking into the NCS 5500 modular family for backbone edge use. > >Any experiences or opinions, positive or negative? Hi Michael, What do you mean by "backbone edge"? A backbone router like a BGP free P node or an

Re: [c-nsp] ASR 99xx IOS-XR images are all EoL/EoS?

On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 at 20:01, Charles Spurgeon wrote: > > Does anyone have info on what is going on? What are people running on > > their ASR 99xx platforms? 64 bit IOS-XR. On Wed, 19 Dec 2018 at 20:21, Tom Hill wrote: > > > It matters deeply which 99xx, and what supervisor(s) you have in it.

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco ASR1004 running IOS 12.2(33)XNF2 does not return SNMP cbQosIfIndex

On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 15:13, Martin T wrote: > Hi! Hi Martin, > I have a Cisco ASR1004 running IOS 12.2(33)XNF2 on IOS XE 02.06.02, > which for some reason, does not return cbQosIfIndex for some > interfaces ... > Is this a bug? Has anyone seen this before? **rubs eyes** Whaa! The oldest

Re: [c-nsp] BGP DFZ convergence time - FIB programming

On 12 October 2018 02:14:03 BST, Tim Warnock wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf >Of >> Robert Raszuk >> So for educational purposes could you describe some real valid use >cases to >> apply bgp policies on routes

Re: [c-nsp] BGP DFZ convergence time - FIB programming

On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 15:30, Robert Raszuk wrote: > I think the difference Mark may have in mind that iBGP routes say from RR are > advertised from RR's control plane. Many RRs today are just x86 control plane > boxes with no forwarding. > > On the other hand number of implementations before

Re: [c-nsp] BGP DFZ convergence time - FIB programming

On 5 October 2018 08:25:35 BST, Mark Tinka wrote: > > >On 5/Oct/18 09:17, Robert Hass wrote: > >> Hi >> I'm looking for share experiences regarding time needed to program >full DFZ >> table (710K IPv4 prefixes) on NCS 5500 boxes. >> >> Right now we testing competitors (Jericho based boxes) and

Re: [c-nsp] BGP DFZ convergence time - FIB programming

On Fri, 5 Oct 2018 at 08:24, Łukasz Bromirski wrote: > > Robert, > > > On 5 Oct 2018, at 09:17, Robert Hass wrote: > > > > Hi > > I'm looking for share experiences regarding time needed to program full DFZ > > table (710K IPv4 prefixes) on NCS 5500 boxes. > > > > Right now we testing competitors

Re: [c-nsp] GRE tunnel (inside ICMP fails after two pings) - Wits End

Have you run a packet capture on your Linux box to see if the Linux box is sending more than two echo requests / that it is receiving more than two echo requests from the router? Have you run an embedded packet capture on the ASR1k to see what it sends / receives? What do you see in your

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 7200's not importing prefixes when RT of ASN:VRF_ID used

Hi Stephen, Do you see the routes being advertised from the iBGP neighoubrs? show bgp vpnv4 uni vrf all neighbor 7200.ibgp.ip.addr adv | beg :999 Do you see the routes being received in the VPNv4 table on the 7200? show bgp vpnv4 uni vrf all neigh ibgp.peer.ip.addr routes | beg :999 show bgp

Re: [c-nsp] Internet speed

On 14 August 2018 at 10:15, Mark Tinka wrote: > > > On 14/Aug/18 11:01, James Bensley wrote: > > I am interesting in writing an open source RFC2544 and Y.1564 > compliant tester, I just recently changed jobs and my new company has > hardware testers for RFC2544, Y.1564, RFC

Re: [c-nsp] Internet speed

On 12 August 2018 at 20:39, Jason Lixfeld wrote: > This thread has me thinking about cases where a MetroE customer might call > and complain about throughput issues, and troubleshooting would normally > require a truck roll to hook up an Ethernet test set. > > Does anyone know of a Y.1564

Re: [c-nsp] EVPN Book/paper recommendation

On 14 July 2018 00:42:46 BST, Sami Joseph wrote: >Heya > >I'm looking for book/paper recommendation on EVPN, specially for >use-cases >in Carrier Ethernet deployments, replacing IETF L2VPN implementation >and >deployments? > >I found this book by Ivan Pepen., but it doesnt cover that.

Re: [c-nsp] Leaked Video or Not (Linux and Cisco for internal Sales folks)

On 29 June 2018 at 13:55, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 01:49:46PM +0100, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote: >> Just wondering what's the latest on the GPU for packet forwarding front (or >> is that deemed legacy now)? > > Last I've heard is that pixel shaders do not map

Re: [c-nsp] [j-nsp] Leaked Video or Not (Linux and Cisco for internal Sales folks)

On 28 June 2018 at 17:29, Tails Pipes wrote: Dude - why have you cross-posted a huge load of fallacies this to three mailing lists simultaneously? Please be more respectful of the list members. Regards, James. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list

Re: [c-nsp] Leaked Video or Not (Linux and Cisco for internal Sales folks)

Hi Saku, On 22 June 2018 at 10:13, Saku Ytti wrote: > Cool stuff, thanks. Didn't look closely, why do they say research and > class-room? This is mostly driven by academia, a bunch of universities collaborating together. Minimal operator input which is a shame. >> [1] Right now FGPA NICs + low

Re: [c-nsp] Leaked Video or Not (Linux and Cisco for internal Sales folks)

On 22 June 2018 at 15:00, Tails Pipes wrote: > Mojatau, Big switch, cumulus, arista and even juniper are trying to move > networking to a better place, but not cisco. they do contribute to it, > there is xdp, ebpf, quagga, vrfs in linux...etc < do you want to deny those > ? just because you have

Re: [c-nsp] Leaked Video or Not (Linux and Cisco for internal Sales folks)

On 22 June 2018 at 09:27, Saku Ytti wrote: > What would be disruptive is someone openly publishing their ASIC/NPU > specs and P4 compiler, so that we use vanillla linux kernel to drive > the forwarding-plane. E.g. https://netfpga.org/site/#/ + https://github.com/p4fpga/p4fpga Open source

Re: [c-nsp] MPLS/DIA on same CPE

On 19 June 2018 at 20:48, Scott Miller wrote: > I'm trying to come up with a config for have both MPLS (within a vrf) and > DIA on the same router,. I have what I thought would work all lab'd up, > but it's not all the way there and i'm not sure what i'm missing, or if it > will even work this

Re: [c-nsp] csr1000v -ports not in order

On 4 June 2018 at 23:49, wrote: > Hi gents, > Thanks for the replies, mine looks similar: > > > > > > > > > > >function='0x0'/> > > > First I thought it's the problem with 48 interfaces in xml -while CSR > supports max

Re: [c-nsp] csr1000v -ports not in order

On 1 June 2018 21:35:22 BST, "Matúš Staudt" wrote: >Hi Adam, > >the ID seems to be the MAC address. > >In our experience, at first boot the VM brings up the interfaces in the >order they are in the XML file. > >After that it remembers the MAC-IFName binding - which can create >"gaps" in your

Re: [c-nsp] XR on GNS3

On 31 May 2018 at 20:26, Ahsan Rasheed wrote: > Hi All, > > I am looking for help. I want to use XR IOS any router on GNS3. Anyone > ever used & any issues? I use it regularly. Just import an XRv device into Virtual-Box, GNS3 can then start/stop virtual-box VMs in headless mode as part of a

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9k from 6.1.4 to 6.2.3

>> On 29 May 2018, at 18:53, Erik Sundberg wrote: >> I ran into this bug going from 6.3.1 to 6.3.2 Very simple fix by >> applying to smu patch files. >> https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCvf01652?emailclick=CNSemail >> >> Not sure when this change in behavior happened, but by

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9k from 6.1.4 to 6.2.3

On 28 May 2018 at 19:54, George Giannousopoulos wrote: > We recently upgraded without any issue. ... > Beware of some rather minor syntax changes in the BNG config Same here, we're migrating from 5.3.3 to 6.2.3. Everything seems fine for us too, we're also not doing anything crazy, L2/L3 VPNs,

Re: [c-nsp] VIRL vs GNS3 vs Else for Automation practicing

On 21 May 2018 05:00:26 BST, Sami Joseph wrote: >Hi, > >I'd like to practice automation, specifically Ansible on different >network >operating systems, Cisco, Cumulus, Juniper. > >VIRL costs money but it has the IOS images bundled, GNS3 doesnt but >i'll >have to find the

Re: [c-nsp] Catalyst 4500 listening on TCP 6154 on all interfaces

On 8 May 2018 at 11:30, frederic.jut...@sig-telecom.net wrote: > Cisco confirm me off-list that this is only a internal usage socket > which is not exposed. > An official info from them should come. I'd test their claim. Can you telnet to that port - do you get

Re: [c-nsp] Catalyst 4500 listening on TCP 6154 on all interfaces

On Monday, 7 May 2018, Roland Dobbins wrote: > On 7 May 2018, at 18:23, frederic.jut...@sig-telecom.net wrote: > > > I've tried to reset to default the config, shutdown all > > interface, remove all L3 ip/feature (no ip blabla), and I still see by > > default 2 TCP ports on

Re: [c-nsp] Copying new IOS to 7600 resulting in IPC logs

On 2 May 2018 at 14:00, Frank Bulk wrote: > No, I do not have anything set. What do you recommend for a value? > > Frank Hi Frank, The default value is 200 (ms). You need to have a play to find out whats right for you. Some 7600s we have with many hundreds of BGP sessions

Re: [c-nsp] Copying new IOS to 7600 resulting in IPC logs

Hi Frank, What do you have set (if anything) for process-max-time? I've not experienced your exact issue before but setting that (if not set) might help - limiting the max CPU time without a context switch to other pending processes. Cheers, James.

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco ASR99xx 64-bit upgrade 6.3.1 to 6.3.2

On Tue, 1 May 2018 07:15 Erik Sundberg, wrote: > Here is a follow up to my email thread > Thanks for the follow-up info Erik, very helpful! Cheers, James. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net

[c-nsp] Persistent Telnet/SSH

Hi All, Is anyone using persistent Telnet/SSH on their IOS-XE devices? https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/routers/asr1000/configuration/guide/chassis/asrswcfg/Console_Telnet_SSH_Handling.html#41157 I'm dubious about configuring it - what issues have people had that have been helped by using

Re: [c-nsp] MACSec Stages

On 20 April 2018 at 06:55, Graham Bartlett (grbartle) wrote: > Hi > > A few of us in Cisco were thinking of writing a CiscoPress book on MACsec, > which would include details of the inner workings, including protocol flows > and how the various key material is derived etc. >

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Router IRB

On 5 March 2018 at 08:42, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Mon, 5 Mar 2018, Arie Vayner wrote: > >> My gut feeling tells me the performance will be the same for irb and >> regular routing. These are software routers, so the performance depends on >> how many and which features you

Re: [c-nsp] Huge SP CPU usage spikes 100%

On 1 March 2018 at 09:53, james list wrote: > xxx#show ibc > Interface information: > 5 minute rx rate 944000 bits/sec, 793 packets/sec > 5 minute tx rate 25000 bits/sec, 37 packets/sec ... > 2467023087 Packets out of 554699386 CEF Switched, 0

Re: [c-nsp] Huge SP CPU usage spikes 100%

On 1 March 2018 at 08:29, james list wrote: > Dear experts, > has anybody experienced a 100% SP CPU usage on C6500-Sup720 (12.2(33)SXI5) > with a lot of interrupts ? > The main process is Heartbeat. > > Cisco TAC is struggling in having an idea to sorting out the issue,

Re: [c-nsp] Multihomed OTV on CSR Lab - Mac Address Issue

On 30 January 2018 at 18:29, Aaron Gould wrote: > Thanks > > "With regards to the load-sharing in L2 > -problem is you'll never get IP like load-sharing in L2 since Ethernet is > fundamentally flawed in this regard as it just can't associate same mac > address with two

Re: [c-nsp] ip vrf autoclassify source - loss of connectivity to hosts

On 26 Jan 2018 18:18, "Aaron Gould" wrote: Thanks James, Ugly and ashamed ? I wonder if we are talking about the same thing Crossed wires indeed :) I was referring to the "ip vrf receive" feature and $dayjob using it for subscribers through RADIUS. For some legacy

Re: [c-nsp] ip vrf autoclassify source - loss of connectivity to hosts

On 25 January 2018 at 06:33, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote: > We use "ip vrf receive" on physical subinterfaces. > Why do you need "ip vrf receive" per subscriber session on the LNS? To dynamically place subscribers into different VRFs. Weather it is applied via RADIUS or on

  1   2   3   4   5   >