FWIW, I had some issues with SRC2 and egress replication.. Might be specific to the ES20+ cards.
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 2:01 PM, John Neiberger <jneiber...@gmail.com> wrote: > If I recall correctly, we have over 500 mroutes. I was just speaking > to a Cisco engineer that works with us about this. I think I'm going > to save this change until last. We have a lot of etherchannels and we > want to convert those to routed links with ECMP first, then we'll > switch over to egress replication. It sounds like we shouldn't have > more than a couple of seconds of impact. > > Thanks! > John > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Tim Stevenson <tstev...@cisco.com> wrote: >> Hi John, >> Switching replication modes basically purges the hardware of all mroutes and >> those will be reprogrammed based on the current software state. It will be >> potentially disruptive for all mroutes, but the exact amount of traffic >> loss/blackholing would depend on the rate of each stream at the time, and >> the overall amount of time it takes to reprogram. For a few 100 mroutes, I >> would not expect much impact. >> >> Hope that helps, >> Tim >> >> At 11:30 AM 9/21/2010, John Neiberger averred: >> >>> We're running 12.2(33)SRC2, I believe. It's actually experimental code >>> and the exact version is overwritten with another code. >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Jeffrey Pazahanick <jeff...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > John, >>> > Having switched back and forth a few times, I never noticed more than >>> > a 1-2 second outage. >>> > What version of code are you on? >>> > >>> > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 11:59 AM, John Neiberger <jneiber...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> >> We're going to be doing a whole bunch of maintenance tonight during a >>> >> maintenance window. One of the many things on our plate is to switch >>> >> from ingress replication mode to egress on some 7600s that have a few >>> >> hundred multicast routes on them. We know there is going to be at >>> >> least a minor blip while things settle down after making the change, >>> >> but I wanted to see if anyone on the list has done this and what the >>> >> operational impact was. I've heard there will be slight interruption >>> >> in traffic, but what sort of interruption are we talking about? Are we >>> >> speaking about a second or two? >>> >> >>> >> I'm asking because we're trying to decide if we want to split this out >>> >> to another night. If the disruption is minor and the risk is low then >>> >> we'll do it tonight. Otherwise, we might choose to do it on a separate >>> >> night. >>> >> >>> >> Any thoughts? >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-...@puck.nether.net >>> >> >>> >> <https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >>> >> archive at >>> >> <http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/>http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ >>> >> >>> > >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-...@puck.nether.net >>> >>> <https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >>> archive at >>> <http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/>http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ >> >> >> >> >> Tim Stevenson, tstev...@cisco.com >> Routing & Switching CCIE #5561 >> Distinguished Technical Marketing Engineer, Cisco Nexus 7000 >> Cisco - http://www.cisco.com >> IP Phone: 408-526-6759 >> ******************************************************** >> The contents of this message may be *Cisco Confidential* >> and are intended for the specified recipients only. >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ 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/
