Re: Can someone interpret this please?
On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Kevin Wigle wrote: Dear group, Investigating a router that is starting to loaded down. When I do a sh proc cpu I get 50% or cpu utilization but the stats don't seem to add up to 50%. Is there another way to try and see where the 50% is coming from? sh proc cpu CPU utilization for five seconds: 44%/44%; one minute: 50%; five minutes: 52% The five second utilization numbers in the above line (44%/44%) represent two things. The first number is total processor utilization and the second is processor utilization due to interrupts. The difference in these two numbers would be the sum of 5sec utilization by all other processes. If utilization due to interrupts increases over time, it represents traffic growth. If it jumps alot in a short amount of time, it may be a DoS attack. You can verify the latter by turning on "ip route-cache flow" on suspected interfaces and then looking at the output of "sh ip cache flow". If the processor gets too high with legitimate traffic, you can use cef or dcef (ip route-cache cef, ip cef distributed). Failing that, you'll probably more beefy hardware. Regards, --phil _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Performance of CEF over Fast Switching
I honestly don't have much experience with it on lower end platforms. The two or three cases I can think of, it has only made a ~ 10% difference. In situations with higher-end hardware (7513, etc), it can drop utilization by 30% or more. If cef is run distributed, the utilization is cut even more. You should be aware that there are numerous bugs with respect to cef. cef adjacencies will become inconsistent, etc. I'd suggest reading the book "Inside IOS software architecture". It has a pretty good section on cef. Regards, --phil | -Original Message- | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of | Kevin Wigle | Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 3:33 PM | To: John Neiberger | Cc: cisco | Subject: Performance of CEF over Fast Switching | | | John, Bob, Raj, Phillip and the Group, | | I hadn't thought of CEF much as I "thought" it wasn't available on the | smaller routers. i.e. - only on the routers with line cards etc. | | However, I just enabled CEF on a 2611 and it created its table | on the fly in | no time flat. The 2611 won't do dCEF however. Also, the smaller routers | can't do cef accounting. | | Anyway, now I have to mock something up in the lab to see if we can | determine how much of any improvement CEF will give us. Since we're not | using CEF anywhere in our network I can't just turn it on | without a bit more | research. | | If it only lessens the CPU load by a few percent then bigger | hardware is in | our future, but if we see gains of 20% or more then CEF would indeed be a | cheap solution. | | I noticed that CEF has issues with policy routing and other | features - but | so far we're not using any of them. | | So, another question - does anyone have any idea/experience on | how much CEF | will gain for us? Given the average 50% load on the router - practically | all switching load??? | | tia | | Kevin Wigle | | | - Original Message - | From: "John Neiberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 4:11 PM | Subject: Re: Can someone interpret this please? | | | > I just checked CCO and there are so many CPU-related bugs in | 12.0(5) that | I stopped counting after a while. You might want to upgrade, if | feasible. | > | > Also, try doing a show align to see if you're getting spurious memory | access errors. One of the bugs mentioned a high CPU usage due to these. | > | > HTH, | > John | > | > > | > > Bob, Phil - and the group. | > > | > > Thanks for the input, gives me more to think about. | > > | > > Some more history.. | > > | > > This router is a 3620 with OC3 and FastEthernet interfaces. | It has 48 | meg | > > and is running 12.0(5)XK1. | > > | > > According to Cisco's docs, the 3620 should be able to handle around | 20-40 | > > kpps. | > > | > > However, the router shows only around 2.6 kpps almost evenly split | in/out. | > > | > > I have been unable to verify exactly on CCO but I suspect that a 3620 | cannot | > > handle (very well) two high-speed interfaces - more | specifically if one | is | > > OC3. | > > | > > I have found info where Cisco, when talking about the OC3 | interface for | the | > > 3600 series stated: | > > | > > "Max two high-speed network modules in a Cisco 3640 (includes Fast | Ethernet, | > > ATM, HSSI)" | > > | > > Now the 3640 has a 100mhz processor and the 3620 has a 80 | mhz processor. | > > | > > I'm wondering if the SAR process is overwhelming the 3620? | I'm sure I | read | > > someplace that only one high-speed interface was recommended for the | 3620 | > > but I haven't found that info again. | > > | > > Considering the low level of traffic, what else could be | keeping the cpu | > > utilization up so high? Need more info. let me know! | > > | > > Kevin Wigle | > > | > > | > > - Original Message - | > > From: "Phillip Heller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | > > To: "Kevin Wigle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | > > Cc: "cisco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | > > Sent: Monday, February 12, 2001 2:12 PM | > > Subject: Re: Can someone interpret this please? | > > | > > | > > > On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Kevin Wigle wrote: | > > > | > > > Dear group, | > > > | > > > Investigating a router that is starting to loaded | down. When I do | a | > > sh proc | > > > cpu I get 50% or cpu utilization but the stats don'
Re: GSR 12008 Gigabit Ethernet line card
Wang, Next time this occurs, send the output of "show int", "show contr", "exec slot sh contr tofab queues", and "exec slot sh contr frfab queues". Also, the running config for the GigE interface on the GSR would be helpful. Regards, --phil On Sun, 18 Feb 2001, Wang wrote: Hi All : Here is a scenario I have encountered. This GSR 12008 actually is served as a Internet Exchange router between A B & C location. The basic requirment for this router is to run BGP4. However, this router have a 1 port Gigabit Ethernet line card connected to a 6509 8 port Gigabit Ethernet module, C also have a gigabit Ethernet port connected to this 8 port module. Everthing is fine and until recently, when the traffic of over the gigabit Ethernet go over 200MBit/s for a period, the interface will automaticaly die. (Die here means no traffic flow in and out for the Gigabit Ethernet line card of the GSR). I would like to resolve this problem. I think IOS 12.0(9)S is not some how stable but which IOS should be used? 1 Route Processor Card 2 Clock Scheduler Cards 3 Switch Fabric Cards 2 four-port OC3 POS controllers (8 POS). 1 Single Port Gigabit Ethernet/IEEE 802.3z controller (1 GigabitEthernet). 1 Ethernet/IEEE 802.3 interface(s) 1 GigabitEthernet/IEEE 802.3 interface(s) 8 Packet over SONET network interface(s) 507K bytes of non-volatile configuration memory. 20480K bytes of Flash PCMCIA card at slot 0 (Sector size 128K). 8192K bytes of Flash internal SIMM (Sector size 256K). Configuration register is 0x102 Thanks ! _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: how to find snmp traffic for an interface
Another option would be to enable cache-flow on that interface, turn on flow-export and use cflowd to display utilization by protocol. For cflowd information, see http://www.caida.org/tools/measurement/cflowd (10 days to my lab, and counting!) Regards, --phil On Mon, 26 Feb 2001, Tom Pruneau wrote: Create an access list on that interface that permits the specifed traffic. Then periodically check the access list and see how many mathces it has had. Also don't forget to put a permit ip any any at the end of your access list to let through all the other taffic which wasn't explicitly permited At 02:31 AM 02/27/2001 -0800, pratik shah wrote: >Hi all, >I want to find out is there any way i could find out >how many bytes/packets are being transferred on an >interface that is of a particular protocol. I want to >find out snmp overhead on an interface. > >thanks in advance >pratik > > >__ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. >http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > >_ >FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html >Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Tom Pruneau Trainer Network Operations GENUITY 3 Van de Graff Drive Burlington Ma. 01803 24 Hr. Network Operations Center 800-436-8489 If you need to get a hold of me my hours are 8AM-4PM ET Mon-Fri --- This email is composed of 82% post consumer recycled data bits --- "Once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right" _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Official Cisco Courseware
All my binders from official cisco classes contain black and white xerox pages, but the binder cover insert and spine insert are color. As each of the courses I took were presented by different companies, I would assume that this is correct. Regards, --phil On Sun, 3 Dec 2000, Brian wrote: Has anyone ever taken a Cisco course, and they give you a 3 ring binder (not a spiral) with hole punched pages that go into it. And the pages are NOT color, but just like black and white/xerox? Or are the pages in the 3 ring binders suppose to be color? _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Static Routes
> 2) how Can traffic be load shared between two redundant links on 1 to 3 > ratio using static routing (i.e. 1 packet on one interface and 3 > packets on the other.) I don't believe you can do this.not "balancing" like that. Do you have something against running EIGRP on those links? How about 2 secondary addresses on the interface that you wish to send 3/4 of the traffic over? ex: int s0 ip address 10.0.0.1 255.255.255.252 int s0 ip address 10.0.0.5 255.255.255.252 ip address 10.0.0.9 255.255.255.252 sec ip address 10.0.0.13 255.255.255.252 sec ip route 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.2 ip route 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.6 ip route 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.10 ip route 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.14 Don't know if this'll work; never tried it. Regards, --phil _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bus Error.....
Piyush,
If you have access to CCO, you can take the output of "sh stack"
("enable" first to get all pertinent data), and run it through the stack
decoder. It will hopefully come up with the cause and associated bug ids.
Research the specified bug ids, and cisco may document a known fix.
Short of the stack decoder, you'll need to open a TAC case.
--phil
On 20 Sep 2000, piyush shah wrote:
hi!
anyone can explain about the bus error cause and remeady.I am experiencing
bus error in four 2511 routers in my network and that causes all routers to
restart.
thanks.
**NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
_
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Juniper
Juniper devices are ok to work with. The hardest thing to get used to is the fact that JunOS is BSD by any other name. Configuration is essentially pretty easy. Of course, coming from a cisco world, I originally feared Juniper boxes, but now I don't mind them so much. --phil On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Mathieu Nantel wrote: JuniperFoot print is the overall physical size of the router. As to whether they're good or not, I have no clue. Never worked with any other routers than Cisco. But then, I've only worked with 2 routers up to now... Mathieu Nantel, ccna, cne, mcp - Original Message - From: Nova Rich To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 5:56 PM Subject: Juniper Help guys, My company wants to buy Juniper routers instead of Cisco. Having never worked with Juniper equipment before I don't know why it's so good. I'm told that it's faster, cheaper and has a smaller foot print? What's a foot print? Is it really better then Cisco? Nova Rich **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Juniper
Actually, after reviewing their product offering, they don't have access devices covered all that well. At the bottom of the spectrum, they offer the M5 router, which may be suitable as an access device for a regional ISP. I'd guess it's intended to compete with the cisco 3600 series. --phil On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Phillip Heller wrote: Juniper has interface cards (PICS) ranging from T1 to OC192. They've also got a channelized DS3 PIC that is capable of supporting DS0 channels. They've got chassis that will support from 4 to 32 PICS, so they've covered core, distribution, and all but the lowest end access devices. **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Juniper
Juniper has interface cards (PICS) ranging from T1 to OC192. They've also got a channelized DS3 PIC that is capable of supporting DS0 channels. They've got chassis that will support from 4 to 32 PICS, so they've covered core, distribution, and all but the lowest end access devices. Cisco is a time tested solution, but I'd guess that Juniper will gain some market share as their products evolve. --phil On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Chuck Larrieu wrote: May I clarify something? Because I believe that Juniper is high end core / carrier class type equipment. Am I correct? We are not talking about replacing 2501's , or 3640's, or even 7500's. We are talking stuff used to terminate many multiple OC3 and higher? Correct? Chuck -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Phillip Heller Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 4:59 PM To: Mathieu Nantel Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: Juniper Juniper devices are ok to work with. The hardest thing to get used to is the fact that JunOS is BSD by any other name. Configuration is essentially pretty easy. Of course, coming from a cisco world, I originally feared Juniper boxes, but now I don't mind them so much. --phil On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Mathieu Nantel wrote: JuniperFoot print is the overall physical size of the router. As to whether they're good or not, I have no clue. Never worked with any other routers than Cisco. But then, I've only worked with 2 routers up to now... Mathieu Nantel, ccna, cne, mcp - Original Message - From: Nova Rich To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 5:56 PM Subject: Juniper Help guys, My company wants to buy Juniper routers instead of Cisco. Having never worked with Juniper equipment before I don't know why it's so good. I'm told that it's faster, cheaper and has a smaller foot print? What's a foot print? Is it really better then Cisco? Nova Rich **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Scripts!!!! and no budget!!!
Purchase a ~$10/month shell script, and investigate expect. Autoexpect is another utility to look into. --phil On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Cthulu, CCIE Candidate wrote: Hi, all, I am currently on an interesting assignment where I have to pull routing information and address information off of about 200-300 routers or switches with router on a stick installed...without using ANY form of network management software, and using only USER level access. **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OT: anyone has Redback experience?
I work with Redback stuff quite a bit. Mostly the SMS 1k and the SMS 1800. I'm just now starting to work with the SMS 10K. Pros: You'll swear they ripped off cisco's command parser and syntax Contexts are cool. Cons: Their QA process is a bit, umm, deficient. (hardware, and software) MPLS isn't a Redback technology. It's used to provide the flexibility, qos, and traffic-engineering characteristics of ATM to IP networks (without using ATM). Juniper has a white paper on it that is a decent starting point (for theory at least). http://www.juniper.net/techcenter/techpapers/21.html --phil On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Jae Kang wrote: Hi all, Does anyone have a good experience with Redback products? Also I think I have a good knowledge about the follwoing two term. MLS (Multilayer Switching - layer 3 switching term ) and MPS(Multiple layer server - ATM term.) But, what about MPLS(?) Is this redback-specific? Regards, _ Jae-Joon Kang - Senior Network Integration Engineer. Ipex Information Technology Group Ph:(07) 3406 5887 Fax: (07) 3406 5859 Mobile: 0410 556 107 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Address: 88 Commercial Rd Newstead, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia _ This e-mail may be confidential. Any opinions expressed herein are the opinion of the writer unless there is an express indication to the contrary. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication please delete and destroy all copies and immediately reply by return e-mail. Ipex ITG disclaims all liability and responsibility for any direct or indirect loss arising from this e-mail and/or any attachments. **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: path exists in BGP table, but no route in IP Routing table
Sean, I would assume that R3 also has two BGP routes to R2, but does not have an entry in the routing table either. Step 1 of the BGP decision process is to ignore routes with an inaccessible next hop. Make sure that R4 knows how to reach the interface(s) advertising the networks that R1 is advertising. Normally, this would be done with an IGP such as OSPF, RIP, IGRP, etc; it could be done with static routes, but this is not a scalable solution. --phil On Wed, 4 Oct 2000, Sean Wu wrote: So what possible reason can cause this problem? I have four routers, R1 <---> R2 ^ ^ | | | | | | v v R3 <---> R4 AS1: R1 AS2: R2 AS3: R3+R4 IBGP between R3 and R4, EBGP between R1/R2, R2/R4, R1/R3 Everything else looks fine, and almost symetric configuration on R1/R3 and R2/R4 But R3 can see R2 in routing table and BGP table, while R4 doesn't see R1's ip in ip routing table, but it does see R1 in BGP table via two different paths **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to get Console message and Debug output by telnet?
"term mon" --phil On Fri, 20 Oct 2000, Andy Xing wrote: How can I get debug message display when I use telnet to config a router? Thanks in advanced Andy Xing _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yet another "CCIE R/S Written Passed" message...
Interesting turn of events today turned out to be. I purchased a voucher long ago that expired 11/1/00, so I scheduled the exam for 10/30 thinking I'd call and postpone my exam till I was ready(which you can do). Unfortunately, you have to call 1 business day in advance. I had forgotten the exam was today until I heard the familiar "duh-dah duh-dah duh-dah" of the Palm Pilot alarm. Needless to say, I uttered several explatives as the exam was in 30 minutes and I hadn't studied in more than a month. Anyways, score breakdown: Cisco Device operation 100 Networking Theory 83 Bridging and Lan Switching 70 TCP/IP 75 IP Routing Protocols90 Desktop Protocols 37 (<-- yuck) Performance Management 66 WAN 66 LAN 100 Security33 (<-- yuck) Multiservice100 Passed with a 76%. Used the following for study materials. Cisco Certification: Bridges, Routers, Switches for CCIEs Cisco IOS Solutions for Network Protocols Volume I: IP Inside Cisco IOS Software Architecture Exam Cram ACRC Exam Cram CLSC Exam Cram CCIE R/S And, I've got a good bit of experience in the field working for a tier I ISP. At work, I work with anything from a 1605's to 12016's (switches inclusive). Unfortunately (or fortunately, dependent upon your viewpoint), we're a strictly IP environment; hence the 37 in Desktop protocols. I'll have to work on that. All in all, I'm quite happy considering that I haven't studied in a while. I will certainly not be quite so haphazard with the scheduling of the lab! I'd be happy to field any questions that don't put me in violation of the NDA. Regards, --phil _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yet another "CCIE R/S Written Passed" message...
I'd like to think so. Too bad they didn't break the score down by protocol, that would be quite helpful. Well, time to convince my employer to let me take home a bunch of routers for lab practice. --phil On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Chuck Church wrote: Wow, Nice score for not studying in a month. I assume you cleaned house in the BGP section, working for an ISP. _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CCIE written (Damn, damn, damn)
Maybe you should just change your name to Chuck. :-) Seriously though, I consider it a miracle that I passed on my first try. The law of averages would suggest that I'll fail my lab on the first try. Speaking of that, I'm scheduled for March 9th in RTP. I'm already dreading it. And let the 4 month study marathon begin. You'll get it next time `round, Shaun. --phil On Mon, 6 Nov 2000, Shaun Wakelen wrote: Well, took the CCIE written today and failed! (63%) Well, know that I have _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Upgrade IOS, boot image
copy tftp bootflash --phil On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, mak wrote: Hi, I would like to know "copy tftp flash" is used to upgrade IOS, how about upgrading boot image Thanks Regards, mak _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: EIGRP over OSPF and BGP
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, Cthulu, CCIE Candidate wrote: Anyways, I got another one: Given: EIGRP 1 RTRA OSPF RTB BGP RTR C OSPF RTRD EIGRP1 I want RTRD and RTRA to become EIGRP peers and do the exchange routing update thing. Granted, they are not directly connected, and do not share a common subnet. If I set up a GRE tunnel between D and A, the picture then becomes: EIGRP1 RTRA <---tunnel---> RTRD EIGRP1 The tunnel becomes the common network, and therefore, EIGRP should be able to work. Only thing I am not sure about is the source interfaces for this tunnel will be different at each end (that is, each source interface will be in a different subnet).I don't have my rack online to test this out, so would appreciate any comments. Thoughts, anyone? The tunnel will have it's own network. This is the network that eigrp will be configured to operate on. Of course, RTRA and RTRD will need to know how to get to x.x.x.x and y.y.y.y, respectively. RTRA: int tunnel0 ip address 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.252 tunnel mode gre ip tunnel source-interface loopback0 tunnel destination x.x.x.x router eigrp 1 network 192.168.0.0 RTRD: int tunnel0 ip address 192.168.0.2 255.255.255.252 tunnel mode gre ip tunnel source-interface loopback0 tunnel destination y.y.y.y router eigrp 1 network 192.168.0.0 Regards, --phil _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Subject: Default Ping Payload
Other patterns of interest are 0x2020 (minimum ones density), and 0x (alternating ones & zeroes; good for finding misoptioned telco equip. on DS3's). --phil On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, Chuck Larrieu wrote: Interesting. It would appear that someone at Cisco had a better sense of humor than did someone at WinToys :-> -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Paul Werner Sent: Monday, November 13, 2000 6:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: Subject: Default Ping Payload > When conducting ping tests from one of our remote routers, I get anywhere from 5-13% packet loss when using the default ping payload, yet when I change the payload to anything else-such as all ones, all zeroes, alternating ones and zeroes-I get no packet loss whatsoever. > This holds true regardless of packet size. However, when using the default data pattern, larger packets get dropped more often than smaller packets. We are seeing zero input or output errors on this interface. > > This seems VERY strange to me, but I think I'll get closer to an answer when I find out what the default pattern is. > > Do any of you know what that is? If you were going from a Cisco router to a Cisco router, it would look like this(watch wrap on all links): http://www.west-point.org/users/usma1983/40768/Chesinc/docs/CiscotoCisco.txt If you were pinging from a Winthing to a Cisco device, it might look like this: http://www.west-point.org/users/usma1983/40768/Chesinc/docs/WinthingtoCisco. txt You will note that the results vary based upon the operating system involved. For a Cisco device, the repeating pattern is the following in binary: 101010001101 Which in hex is ABCD. You can vary the pattern to any four value hex character combination that you choose. Obvious choices would be 0x or 0x or maybe 0x (equal mix of ones and zeros in the payload). Of course, you will need to be in priviledge mode to do an extended ping and ensure you choose "extended commands". HTH, Paul Werner Get your own "800" number - Free Free voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BGP load balancing
Andy, ebgp-multihop simply allows you to specify the TTL of the ip packet containing bgp updates, etc. This is useful if you have multiple parallel paths configured for per-packet load sharing. To control traffic entering your autonomous sytem, you can use route-maps to prepend your autnomous system number one or more times for a specific prefix towards a specific neighbor, making that path less preferable. Also, you may have the option of setting specific communities on prefixes outbound towards your providers that will accomplish various things. You'll need to check with your providers to determine if that is a possibility though. --phil On Wed, 15 Nov 2000, Andy wrote: Hi all, I want to know that does command ebgp-multihop provide load balancing over ATM for a router, also how can I configure ebgp to control incoming traffic from my ISP Regards Andy _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: !H
Host unreachable. --phil On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Jason yee wrote: hi anyone knows what does the symbol !H means in traceroute results _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: !H not a complete answer
From cisco: "If the router receives a datagram which it is unable to deliver to it's ultimate destination because it knows of no route to the destination address, it replies to the originator of that datagram with an ICMP Host Unreachable message." An access-list denying icmp echo-requests will simply not permit the forwarding of icmp echo-requests. From the use of ping, this would be observed as timeouts rather than "Host Unreachable" or "!H". --phil | -Original Message- | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of | Jennifer Cribbs | Sent: Monday, November 20, 2000 1:13 PM | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Subject: RE: !H not a complete answer | | | This response is returned when an access list somewhere along the path | prevents a router from forwarding a packet to the HOST. | | and that is correct. | | Jennifer Cribbs | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CCIE Lab tools?
No notes, no books (the IOS doc set is available as is the doc cd), no Internet access (well, except for the lab "log in" and "critique" pages.) Further, no cell phones, pagers, or pda's. Regards, --phil On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, AndyD wrote: I'm preparing for the CCIE lab. Does anyone know if they allow any form of notes, books, or internet access during the lab? Thanks! _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tues funnies
The coolest part of the whole thing is the URL trickery. --phil On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Allen May wrote: If I owned that patent I would have only charged 2 cents per use. - Original Message - From: "Brandon Rose" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 1:16 PM Subject: OT: Tues funnies > http://www.cnn.com@sci-tech@3520040376/new_010325/alert/breakingnews.html > > > Pre-April Fools? > > Brandon > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CCIE lab scenarios to trade
I sincerely hope this is an April Fools joke. --phil On Sun, 1 Apr 2001, mike johnson wrote: hello, Wondering if anyone has any real CCIE lab scenarios to trade? I am scheduled for the CCIE lab in July. I am not too concern with Cisco NDA because I know that most people don't. I am willing to trade with anyone. Mojo. _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CCIE LAB scenario to trade
If you're looking for the actual labs, why don't you email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask them, I hear they have lots of real labs. I'm sure they'd love to trade you and they might even be willing to give you 5-10 in minimum security if you ask nicely. If you're looking for labs of similar complexity and difficulty, try http://www.ccbootcamp.com --phil | -Original Message- | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of | jupiter-kim | Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 11:38 AM | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Subject: CCIE LAB scenario to trade | | | hello, | | if anyone has any real CCIE lab scenarios to trade? | I am scheduled for the CCIE lab in May. I am too concern with Cisco | CCIE-LAB. | | | | jupiter kim. | _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Juniper on FreeBSD [7:1303]
The Olive is simply the JunOS code running on a compatible PC. If you've got the JunOS package, make the LS120 image, get an intel based pc with an LS120 drive. The image should just boot. Regards, --phil On Thu, 19 Apr 2001, KY wrote: All, Any of you ever had luck on porting Juniper to a FreeBSD box? I heard that you could download the Junos and then tweak the BSD so that make it just like the real box. I know Olive, but I guess that is something else, although anybody can give me or tell me how to get a copy of Olive would be appreciated. I could not find any thing from FreeBSD sites, any input would be helpful. Thanks KY FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=1321&t=1303 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Slightly OT: 7500 Single Slot Reload [7:17699]
On Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 12:19:41PM -0400, John Neiberger wrote: We may need to upgrade our CIP software on a production 7513 during the day. We've been having some issues over the last couple of days and if things go south again we want to upgrade. In the past we haven't been able to do this on the fly without reloading the entire router. Now that single-slot reload is available I'd like to make use of it if it's safe. Have any of you had any experience with single-slot reloads? Do they work as advertised or do they tend to hose up your router anyway? Are there any caveats I need to be aware of? I see that I have to use the command "service single-slot-reload-enable" to turn on the feature, but what is the command to actually do the reload? I haven't found that yet and it's not in the Related Commands section of the 12.0 command reference. I've found any type of OIR or similar work on the 7500 series to have about a 50% success rate. To execute a single slot reload, try: conf t mic rel --phil Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=17706&t=17699 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FW: NANOG 20 (URL Correction)
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000, Irwin Lazar wrote: NANOG - the North American Network Operators Group - is an association of engineers and operators from internet and network service providers. See http://www.nanog.edu <http://www.nanog.edu> . The cost is only $300 if you register in advance. URL should be http://www.nanog.org Regards, Phil -- Phillip Heller Associate Network Engineer 781-262-7006 - Genuity - -- **Affiliation for association not representation** ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: BGP on the Brain - Design Issue
There are several ways you can affect how traffic enters your autonomous system. The most popular is prepending your autonomous system number 1 or more times on your outbound announcements. Though, some find that prepending is not granular enough. You can go a step further, and prepend outbound only on specific prefixes. Some ISP's also will allow you to set certain communites on your outbound announcements and alter how they announce your networks to their peers. Inquire with you ISP's as to whether they implement any such features. Some of this is dependent upon the size of your announcements, though. If you're announcing a /24, and it can be aggregated into a /8 at your ISP's borders, it's not likely that your ISP will announce a specific just for the benefit of your traffic flows. Internet Routing Architectures is an excellent book by Sam Halabi that you may wish to reference. Also of value is BGP4: Inter-Domain Routing in the Internet by John Stewart III. Good luck! --phil [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Krake, Kris wrote: Along the lines of this thread I have something to ponder Suppose we have the situation as posed below but I need to manipulate how data comes into my AS not out of it. ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: What is better? MLPP or load balancing with IOS [7:41249]
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 09:17:38PM -0400, Sayeed Mohammed wrote: Hello, I am planning to load balance 3 T1 lines going to same destination. I would like to know if somebody has implemented MLPPP for this purpose? Is it better than IOS load balancing? Cisco document says that MLPP is better but more CPU intensive. Please give your real life experience. Thanks. Sayeed Sayeed, When you say IOS load balancing, I assume you're talking about CEF Per-Packet load-balancing? If so, it's a fine choice if neither router is a GSR with an engine 2 line card. If there is a GSR with an engine 2 line card, then it won't support CEF per-packet load-balancing in any version prior to 12.0(21)S, and then it only does it at a severe performance loss. -- Regards, --phil Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=41310&t=41249 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PPP Multilink studies - interesting results [7:21623]
Chuck, Round times will be roughly the same regardless of whether there's 1 T1 or 8 T1's in the multilink bundle. There is a limit to the speed bits will move in copper. However, the more T1's you have in the bundle, the more bits you can send at the same time. I'd suggest you retry your test using the "ttcp" command, which tests TCP throughput rather than latency. Throughput and latency are two decidedly different beasts. I've extensively tested Multilink PPP in the lab (since cisco broke CEF per-packet load-sharing on OC48 Line cards), and I can verify that Multilink PPP does increase throughput. I might be able to dig out some of my data, if you're interested. Regards, --phil On Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 11:33:39PM -0400, Chuck Larrieu wrote: A couple of weeks ago there were a couple of discussions on this board about using multiple T1's to improve data throughput. If memory serves, there were two possible ways to do this: 1) per packet load sharing and 2) PPP multilink for no particular reason I decided to do a little study on PPP multilink. Well, OK, I do have two particular reasons - an upcoming Lab and a customer who is asking about this. So, I build a scenario as follows: serial0 token ring R6R5---R4 || serial1 to test throughput, I used extended ping, with multiple pings and various size payloads, from a loopback on R4 to a loopback on R6. the routing protocol was EIGRP, done to assure per packet routing between R6 and R5 as a control. My results were interesting, to say the least. unexpected, but so consistent that there is no question, in my mind, anyway, about some of the assumptions many of us make about various load sharing and multiplexing options. a summary of the results are using the Cisco router reporting of min/avg/max round trip times - the middle number is the one to watch. packet size PPP multilinksingle serial link configured as PPP multilink 100024/24/13220/20/104 150028/29/52 24/27/112 500 16/19/64 12/13/104 64 12/14/60 4/7/104 note that in every case, the single link, configured for PPP multilink, is SIGNIFICANTLY faster than the dual link. Interesting. So I constructed some further experiments, using extended ping, multiple packets of variable size - range 64 to 1500: PPP multilinkper packet load share single T1 8/17/136 4/17/136 4/17/144 these figures are from over 15,000 pings per scenario, so it is not a case of random chance here. there is no difference whatsoever between the results of a single serial link, per packet load sharing over two serial links, and PPP multilink. what is most surprising is that a single serial connection proves JUST AS FAST as a dual serial connection. Now what I conclude from this is an opinion that multiple T1's DO NOT really do much for you in terms of more bandwidth. At least for the kinds of data flows I am able to generate in the lab. Furthermore, PPP multilink is actually harmful to throughput. So I gotta ask - is load sharing really adding anything to the mix? Really? In real world scenarios and data flows, where is it that you are gaining anything? Lastly, I set up a final scenario in which I sent 5000 byte packets. this means fragmentation and reassembly would occur, because the MTU on all wan interfaces is 1500 bytes. Here are the results when pinging 5000 times using a 5000 byte payload: single serial link: 64/66/168 per packet load share: 64/64/168 ppp multilink: 48/52/172 note here that the load sharing scenario is slightly faster than the single serial link, and that the ppp multilink is FAR AND AWAY faster that the other two. I suspect the reason for this is efficiencies gained under the multilink scenario when fragmenting and reassembling the oversized payloads In any case, I hope this presentation will lead to some good discussion of bandwidth and results. would it be fair to suggest that peoples' efforts to solve what they perceive as bandwidth issues by implementing multiple WAN links is really a study in fruitless activity? Maybe I should have set up some IPX scenarios? Chuck Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=21661&t=21623 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: multiple Individual T1 termination --urgent [7:47944]
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 02:44:43PM +, Vajira Wijesinghe wrote: Hi Group, I have a client who needs 188 T1 (all 1.544Mb serial lines) terminations to be done on the central site. Network is hub and spoke fashion. Pls advise the suitable Cisco router/routers on the central site, for this purpose. We use Cisco GSR's with 6xCT3 (blizzard) cards with great success. Have the telco mux all those DS1 into Channelized T3s for you. That'll be a lot cheaper than muxing them yourself at the core site. --phil Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=48059&t=47944 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Route Reflection with Multiple POPs [7:48509]
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 04:42:25PM +, Lupi, Guy wrote: Let me preface this by saying that I am trying to learn more about large scale BGP design and operation. This question is on route reflectors when you have multiple POPs in seperate IGP domains. If you currently have one POP and are going to move to 2 within the same AS, you can either run full mesh (doesn't scale), reflectors, or confederations. Assuming you don't currently have a central core that the POPs connect back to, how well does reflection scale? I was reading Building Service Provider Networks [Berkowitz], and it states that iBGP doesn't scale well once you go above 15-20 sessions per router. It also states that most ISPs run reflectors instead of confederations, but I believe that statement is being made under the assumption that the ISP will have a central core to which the POPs will connect. This would indicate to me that assuming you don't have a central core, one could only connect 6 or 7 POPs (dual reflectors for redundancy) together using reflection before you would have to either create a central core to reduce the amount of iBGP sessions, or turn to confederations. Perhaps the best way to accomplish this would be to establish a "core" in one of the POPs and run reflection from there, which is also presented as a solution in the book? Any opinions? I have made an attempt at ASCII drawing below, to me the central core solution makes more sense. In my experience, a core ibgp mesh will scale to at least 70 sessions per device. I would suggest that route reflection certainly be done between core and aggregation devices per pop. Central reflection may be prone to failure depending on the design of the network. Also, when you mention seperate igp domains, are you referring to areas/levels, or instances? Both OSPF and ISIS scale quite well using area or level hierarchy, which mostly mitigates the necessity for seperate igp instances. Regards, --phil Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=48521&t=48509 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Route Reflection with Multiple POPs [7:48509]
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 04:48:30PM -0400, Lupi, Guy wrote: When you say that OSPF scales very well in a heirarchy, I realize that there are a lot of factors involved. Let's assume that all routers in each POP with the exception of aggregation and core are in NSSA areas to control LSA's but still be allowed to insert external routes, but obviously the routers in the core would have to maintain all of the information. How large can you scale a topology like this? I am not concerned so much with the number of routers, but with the number of routes. Are we talking about 8000, 16000, 24000, 4 routes? I also realize the types of LSA's play a big part in OSPF, but assuming that your aggregation and core routers were very high end Juniper or Cisco routers, what would be a general number using OSPF? ISIS? In a single ospf instance, and without summarization or stubby/nssa areas, I've seen ~ 4000 subnets. With summarization and/or stubby/nssa areas, I've seen as many as 6000. n.b. - these above numbers are rounded and are examples observed on networks that are comprised of very high end routers. The key is to carry only infrastructure networks in your igp. Minimize infrastructure networks in igp by aggregating (ie, redist a static /24 for all you /30 point-to-point customers). Use bgp to carry customer prefixes. Networks with 16000 routes in igp are probably on the border of resource starvation with hardware that is deployed. Networks with more than 16000 routes in igp are probably doing something like redisting bgp into igp, which is always a bad idea. --phil Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=48539&t=48509 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Route Reflection with Multiple POPs [7:48509]
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 10:27:08PM +, Lupi, Guy wrote: I know that you can run confederations and reflectors, and seperate levels of reflection, which Cisco refers to as "nested reflection". Now my question is, how would you set up your bgp peering? Due to financial constraints I would imagine that the best thing to do would be to have one circuit from POP router 1 to core router 1, and another circuit from POP router 2 to core router 2. Assuming that you are only running BGP in the core, and that the clients have to have a session with each reflector, how would you communicate the loopback addresses of all the routers to each other? Are static routes used in this situation? Thanks to all of the people who responded by the way, I appreciate the direction. Ever feel like you know so much, only to read a book and find out that you know so little :)? I hate to say it, but the question is somewhat ambiguous and confusing... First and foremost, what is the physical topology of your backbone? How many devices are you dealing with? These days, most large service provider networks are of a partial mesh (physical) design. There is no central "core" site. Each pop has several aggregation boxes and several "core" boxes. The core boxes connect to each other and to other pop's core boxes. Also, the core boxes provide connections for the aggregation boxes. While it's common to see route-reflection from the core to aggregation boxes, it's less common to see route-reflection from one pop to other *multihomed* pops. Generally, customers maintain one bgp session per physical connection to the network; further, the bgp sessions are generally between the directly connected devices. Sometimes customers will want to bond multiple equal bandwidth paths. In this instance, customers generally have less than one bgp session per physical connection (ie: ebgp-multihop with static routes and cef, or Multilink PPP). --phil Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=48556&t=48509 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Route Reflection with Multiple POPs [7:48509]
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 01:28:08AM +, Lupi, Guy wrote: I had a feeling that would happen, I will try to clarify. I was not trying to say that there should be a central core site for the ISP's entire network, but for pieces of it. Lets take a state like New York, within it you have 3 POPs, each is in it's own AS and runs an IGP. In each POP you have 2 core routers and 3 aggregation routers, the 2 core routers have EBGP connections and are reflectors for the 3 aggregation routers. Now you want all 4 POPs to be in the same AS, and they have to have direct connectivity to your 3 New Jersey POPs which should also be in the same AS. In that case, would it make sense to choose a NY POP and a NJ POP, install 2 core or backbone routers that do not participate in any IGP, use those to peer with the POPs in that state and in turn peer with the other state's core or backbone routers? This would significantly reduce the amount of peering that would be required. Hopefully the drawing won't be a disaster. NY POP 1 NJ POP 1 o o o o o o o o o o NY POP 2 NJ POP 2 o o o---o o o o \ / o o o/ \o o o---o NY POP 3 NJ POP 3 o o o o o o o o o o Are you suggesting seperate per-pop AS's as a result of confederations, or otherwise? Confederations will certainly work, but may be overkill for a 6 pop regional network. I would suggest a single externally visible AS with a unified IGP. IGP convergence time is much preferrable to BGP convergence time. Also, BGP is better suited for political/administrative division, which shouldn't be necessary between the two regional networks. Also, when you say "...reduce the amount of peering...", are you referring to the number of ibgp sessions, external peering arrangements, or transit connections? --phil Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=48569&t=48509 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Route Reflection with Multiple POPs [7:48509]
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 01:14:07AM +, Howard C. Berkowitz wrote: >Did you mean "there is no excuse for [not] having a very clean >hierarchical addressing structure or I'm I missing something, as always..:-> > >TIA >Nigel You've got me. A "dirty" infrastructure addressing system is a sin beyond redemption. The corollary to this being, "large, inherited dirty infrastructure addressing systems can be nearly impossible to clean up." :-) --phil Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=48571&t=48509 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BGP Route Reflectors? [7:50573]
Well, route-reflectors and route-reflector-clients have an iBGP relationship with each other, yet the route-reflector-clients need not be part of the full mesh. iBGP speakers tell each other about locally injected routes, routes learned from ebgp neighbors, and routes learned from ibgp route-reflector-clients. Additionally, iBGP speakers announce all bgp routes to route-reflector-clients. Of course, the above is subject to applied routing policies. Route-reflection (and confederations), in my experience, are best used when physical (or administrative) hierarchy promote a matching routing hierarchy. For instance, say a site has 2 core routers connected to core routers at other sites, and 2 distribution routers connected to the two local core routers, and each other. It would make sense to make the core routers part of the full ibgp mesh, and then make the distribution routers route-reflector-clients of both core routers at that site. In large networks, a combination of confederations and route-reflectors can really cut down on the overhead involved in managing huge router configs. Regards, --phil On Sat, Aug 03, 2002 at 05:06:18AM +, Chuck wrote: only the iBGP speakers must be in a full mesh - not necessarily the entire network. ""Robert D. Cluett"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Group, > > In reading the BSCN book, I have stumbled across something confusing when it > is discussing "route reflectors". The books states that the use of route > reflectors eliminates the need to run BGP in a full mesh environment. Based > on this statement I have assumed that BGP therefore must be configured only > on a network that is fully meshed (unless route reflectors are used). Is > this true? > > Robert D. Cluett, CCNA -- Regards, --phil Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=50577&t=50573 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
