Hi
I have not verified but the more specific one should be before the general
rule.
So you should switch them around.
interface TenGigabitEthernet0/1
service instance 10 ethernet
encapsulation dot1q 10 second-dot1q 555
rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
bridge-domain 10555
service
There's drawbacks to customer prefixes in BGP - and one of them is
convergence is slower plus more potential for loops while
reconverging...
And here I would object that with PIC-Core and PIC-Edge BGP is as fast as
OSPF/ISIS doing IP FRR.
adam
We are looking at deploying dedicated route reflectors on 1U Dell or HP
servers against inside ESXi or Qemu/KVM hypervisors, mostly to benefit
from the super quick multi- core CPU's and tons of fast RAM that you just
don't get in routers.
I'll report back how this goes, in a few months, as
On Thursday, December 12, 2013 10:30:06 AM Adam Vitkovsky
wrote:
And here I would object that with PIC-Core and PIC-Edge
BGP is as fast as OSPF/ISIS doing IP FRR.
I have seen extraordinary BGP performance in modern code in
IOS and Junos, particularly in NG-MVPN scenarios where BGP
is
On Thursday, December 12, 2013 10:42:01 AM Adam Vitkovsky
wrote:
Hi Mark,
Do you plan on running virtual XR, XE or JUNOS or even
some customized BGP daemon on those?
I'm very interested on how it will work out for you.
I'm all pro for virtualizing BGP control plane, makes so
much sense.
I'll let you know how we go; but yes, all that RAM and CPU that will be
available in a 1U server vs. a (decent) router like the ASR1001 or Juniper
RE-1800X4 is too hard to resist.
Or even imagine a pool of these geographically distributed with multiple
links to core at each site.
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 10:04:20AM +0100, Adam Vitkovsky wrote:
I'll let you know how we go; but yes, all that RAM and CPU that will be
available in a 1U server vs. a (decent) router like the ASR1001 or Juniper
RE-1800X4 is too hard to resist.
Or even imagine a pool of these
On 12/12/13 09:08, Gert Doering wrote:
My imagination sees outage in the VM management infrastructure which leads
to all RRs being down at the same time, and no network left to bring them
back... *shiver*
Agreed - anyone using the helpful automagic stuff like vCentre for
something like an RR
On Thursday, December 12, 2013 11:04:20 AM Adam Vitkovsky
wrote:
Or even imagine a pool of these geographically
distributed with multiple links to core at each site.
VM-overlay on the pool and run RRs on top of that and
you'll end up with RRs infrastructure that is never down
and will scale
On Thursday, December 12, 2013 11:08:20 AM Gert Doering
wrote:
(OTOH using the technologies Mark mentioned, having a VM
layer makes sense - if the routing engine is not
software run on top of a general purpose OS but a
routing engine VM running on top of a hypervisor...
but then more along
On 12/12/2013 09:44, Mark Tinka wrote:
All I'm getting from doing this on servers and not routers
is the CPU and RAM advantage.
+ the possibility of genuine oob if you have a separate oob infrastructure.
Nick
___
cisco-nsp mailing list
On Thursday, December 12, 2013 11:50:38 AM Nick Hilliard
wrote:
+ the possibility of genuine oob if you have a separate
oob infrastructure.
That too, yes.
Three links into each server - 2x links into the core
backbone which is what the router OS will see for IS-IS +
iBGP, and 1x Ethernet
On 12/12/2013 09:31, Phil Mayers wrote:
Agreed - anyone using the helpful automagic stuff like vCentre for
something like an RR is crazy. We've had issues with it exploding and the
VMs being unmanageable.
Agreed. For network-critical stuff, I wouldn't touch that management crap
with a
My imagination sees outage in the VM management infrastructure which
leads to all RRs being down at the same time, and no network left to
bring them back... *shiver*
Agreed - anyone using the helpful automagic stuff like vCentre for
something like an RR is crazy. We've had issues with it
On 12/12/2013 10:03, Adam Vitkovsky wrote:
I rather meant some proven solution like e.g. Amazon uses to provide cloud
computing services.
No, no and more no. Total layering violation and abandonment of KISS
principal. Not clever.
Nick
___
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:03:04AM +0100, Adam Vitkovsky wrote:
I rather meant some proven solution like e.g. Amazon uses to provide cloud
computing services.
Like, proven until it falls over? Not like bits and pieces of the Amazon
(or Azure) cloud hasn't fallen apart with cascading
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013, Mark Tinka wrote:
CSR1000v is supported on ESXi only today, and to load it up,
you require vSphere client. I'd rather you didn't, but it's
FWIW - not anymore:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/csr1000/software/configuration/csroverview.html#wp1081607
I happily
On Thursday, December 12, 2013 12:06:54 PM Nick Hilliard
wrote:
No, no and more no. Total layering violation and
abandonment of KISS principal. Not clever.
+1.
Don't know why anyone would run their critical
infrastructure on a remote cloud :-).
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is
On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
On Thursday, December 12, 2013 12:06:54 PM Nick Hilliard
wrote:
No, no and more no. Total layering violation and
abandonment of KISS principal. Not clever.
+1.
Don't know why anyone would run their critical
On 15/11/13 12:02, Saku Ytti wrote:
On (2013-11-15 09:48 +), Phil Mayers wrote:
Has anyone else seen this? Our N7k CoPP policy seems to be letting
packets through which are arriving MPLS-labelled. In particular,
this means it's completely ineffective at protecting the CPU in an
L3VPN,
Hi,
Looking for a quick pointer here, I need to get a remote SPAN session active
from one of our ASR9K units across a few Cat6K chassis and into an analyser. We
use RSPAN across all the 6Ks without any issues, and from my understanding the
ASR needs to egress the captured packets out of a
Follow-up to the follow-up :) Long story short...
Switch essentially had no flash and dir, etc gave errors. TAC had us
boot from tftp image via ROMMON. Booted up, found config, write mem
worked, founds it's VSS partner, and dropped to standby. Rebooted the
other switch, this one became
Hello,
We currently have our gateway / web filter routing setup in this manor:
lan --- 2921 ---asa(firewall) ---internet
|
-- web filter
So the traffic destined to the internet that is not supposed to be filtered
goes right through the router to the asa. The
On Friday, December 13, 2013 01:05:20 AM Jeff Kell wrote:
Still don't understand why even ROMMON couldn't find a
flash, yet tftp booting IOS seemed to make everything
well again. But not looking a gift horse in the mouth,
just wondering in case this shows up again. I really
don't like the
Hi All,
How can we accomplish below command in Cisco Nexus switch ? Basically I
want to send the configuration file to ftp server once I save the config.
Also trying to search on Cisco link, haven't found anything related yet.
Much appreciate if you could give the link or config.
-
25 matches
Mail list logo
