Re: [c-nsp] Protecting Wireless Network from Jammers

[Christopher J. Wargaski]

Hey Felix--

I work in the 802.11 wireless arena and am also an amateur radio
operator. Aside from finding the offending station, there is really nothing
that can be done to prevent RF signal jamming.

   In the ham radio world, we practice finding the source of offending
transmissions by having "fox hunt" events. The technology we use is pretty
much limited to directional antennae and signal strength meters.





> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 01:32:44 +
> From: Felix Nkansah 
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] Protecting Wireless Network from Jammers
> Message-ID:
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi,
>
> Most cities around the world (like Chicago in the USA) have deployed
> wireless mesh networks (operating in the Public Safety 4.9 Ghz band) for
> connecting their city-wide surveillance cameras.
>
> Since wireless networks are vulnerable to spectrum jammers, I am wondering
> how the authorities prevent rogue citizens from jamming these wireless
> video
> surveillance networks, even if temporary?
>
> Is there some kind of technology that can be used to make wireless networks
> less susceptible to jammers?
>
> Thanks. Felix
>
>
___
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/

[c-nsp] Netflow Version 9

[Righa Shake]

Hi,

am looking to deploy netflow version 9.
What are the pros and cons as compared to version 5.

what is version 9 impact on router and traffic
Rgrds,
Shake
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Scaling L2

[T Johnson]

Certainly you can throw more hardware at it, but eventually you still
run out of capacity. I think the vendors realize this which is why
things like TRILL are being developed. However, it seems like this
could be solved other ways as well. Unfortunately it sounds like
others aren't quite as concerned?

Thanks,
Thomas

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Peter Serwe  wrote:
> You need something bigger/better to aggregate on.
> Peter
>
> On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 4:12 PM, T Johnson  wrote:
>>
>> I have a virtualization environment that is quickly growing and I tend
>> to use "smaller" catalyst 2xxx and 3xxx series switches. One problem I
>> see coming up is running out of MAC address table space on these
>> switches as well as tons of L2 broadcast traffic.
>>
>> My question is this: does cisco have a way to deal with this when
>> you'd want to keep things in one L2 domain (rather than
>> forcing L3 boundaries)? I see the TRILL/fabricpath stuff, but of
>> course it only runs on switches I don't have the budget for.
>>
>> Dreaming up things... it would seem fairly easy if I could just
>> "route" sets of MAC addresses out to different connected switches.
>> It's fairly easy to assign MAC addresses on the server side to help
>> support
>> this. Anything like this possible? Or another solution?
>>
>> Thanks
>> ___
>> 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/
>
>
>
> --
> Peter Serwe
> http://truthlightway.blogspot.com/
>

___
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/

[c-nsp] Seeking input on VPN throughput on Cisco 7206 w/ NPE-G1

[Rich Davies]

Hello,

I am looking to potentially terminate a site-to-site IPSEC VPN on a Cisco
7206VXR with NPE-G1 route processor.   Can anyone tell me what the VPN
throughput is of this hardware setup?  Also is there an official Cisco
document with this information?   I tried a few searches and it seems most
of the throughput comparisons are based on the 7206 having the SA-VAM2+ VPN
accelerator module installed which I do not have.


Thanks,

Rich
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

[Sascha Pollok]

Jeff,

thanks for that link. My wife says it's just perfect for me.
Why's that? :-)

Rgds from "the engine room"
Sascha

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011, Jeff Wojciechowski wrote:


Feel free to ban me from the list after this one but I had to interject this 
T-Shirt:

http://fashionablygeek.com/t-shirts/has-owning-a-smartphone-changed-the-way-you-poop/

:)

(again sorryhe he)

-Jeff


-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net 
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Scott Granados
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 10:50 AM
To: Ziv Leyes
Cc: 'cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net'
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

Taking a dump is when I do my best thinking.;)


On Jan 13, 2011, at 1:09 AM, Ziv Leyes wrote:


EXACTLY!!!

Like concentrating ONLY on it... (healthiest)

-Original Message-
From: Daniel Hooper [mailto:dhoo...@emerge.net.au]
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 9:57 AM
To: Ziv Leyes; 'cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net'
Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

I can think of so many more exciting & better things to do while taking a dump.

-Dan

-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ziv Leyes
Sent: Thursday, 13 January 2011 3:30 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

Yeah, should be very useful to be able to open a TAC case while taking a dump...



-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of John Neiberger
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 6:16 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

I don't know about everyone else, but how cool would it be to have TAC case 
management tools on our smart phones?

I would absolutely love a TAC app on my Android phone. That would be extremely 
useful. I'm surprised out doesn't already exist.

What do you all think?
___
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/



**
** This footnote confirms that this email message has been
scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & 
computer viruses.
**
**




The information contained in this e-mail message and its attachments is 
confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity 
named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you 
are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender, and then 
delete the message from your computer.  Thank you!

 This mail was sent via Mail-SeCure System.





**
** This footnote confirms that this email message has been
scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & 
computer viruses.
**
**




___
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/



**
** This footnote confirms that this email message has been
scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & 
computer viruses.
**
**




The information contained in this e-mail message and its attachments is 
confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity 
named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you 
are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender, and then 
delete the message from your computer.  Thank you!

 This mail was sent via Mail-SeCure System.





**
** This footnote confirms that this email message has been
scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code,
vandals & computer viruses.
**
**




___
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailma

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

[Jeff Wojciechowski]

Feel free to ban me from the list after this one but I had to interject this 
T-Shirt:

http://fashionablygeek.com/t-shirts/has-owning-a-smartphone-changed-the-way-you-poop/

:)

(again sorryhe he)

-Jeff


-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net 
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Scott Granados
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 10:50 AM
To: Ziv Leyes
Cc: 'cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net'
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

Taking a dump is when I do my best thinking.;)


On Jan 13, 2011, at 1:09 AM, Ziv Leyes wrote:

> EXACTLY!!!
>
> Like concentrating ONLY on it... (healthiest)
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Hooper [mailto:dhoo...@emerge.net.au]
> Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 9:57 AM
> To: Ziv Leyes; 'cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net'
> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?
>
> I can think of so many more exciting & better things to do while taking a 
> dump.
>
> -Dan
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ziv Leyes
> Sent: Thursday, 13 January 2011 3:30 PM
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?
>
> Yeah, should be very useful to be able to open a TAC case while taking a 
> dump...
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of John Neiberger
> Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 6:16 PM
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?
>
> I don't know about everyone else, but how cool would it be to have TAC case 
> management tools on our smart phones?
>
> I would absolutely love a TAC app on my Android phone. That would be 
> extremely useful. I'm surprised out doesn't already exist.
>
> What do you all think?
> ___
> 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/
>
>
>
> **
> ** This footnote confirms that this email message has been
> scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & 
> computer viruses.
> **
> **
>
>
>
>
> The information contained in this e-mail message and its attachments is 
> confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or 
> entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
> this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the 
> sender, and then delete the message from your computer.  Thank you!
>
>  This mail was sent via Mail-SeCure System.
>
>
>
>
>
> **
> ** This footnote confirms that this email message has been
> scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & 
> computer viruses.
> **
> **
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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/
>
>
>
> **
> ** This footnote confirms that this email message has been
> scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & 
> computer viruses.
> **
> **
>
>
>
>
> The information contained in this e-mail message and its attachments is 
> confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or 
> entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
> this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the 
> sender, and then delete the message from your computer.  Thank you!
>
>  This mail was sent via Mail-SeCure System.
>
>
>
>
>
> **
> ** This footnote confirms that this email message has been
> scanned by PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code,
> vandals & computer viruses.
> **
> **
>
>
>
>
> ___
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp@puck.nether.

Re: [c-nsp] SFP-GE-T

[Phil Mayers]

On 01/13/2011 08:38 PM, jack daniels wrote:

is there any RJ45 port on SUP. I thnk its not , only thig u


SUP720 and RSP720 both have an RJ45 port; If your sup is in slot 5, int 
Gi5/2 is a dual-port port:


int Gi5/2
  media rj45

...and those ports support 10/100 operation.
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] SFP-GE-T

[David Prall]

The second port on the RSP720 is user selectable. Media-type rj45

David

--
http://dcp.dcptech.com


> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
> boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of jack daniels
> Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 3:39 PM
> To: Nick Hilliard
> Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SFP-GE-T
> 
> is there any RJ45 port on SUP. I thnk its not , only thig u can do is
> use SFP electrical or optical.
> 
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 1:55 AM, Nick Hilliard  wrote:
> > On 13/01/2011 19:42, jack daniels wrote:
> >>
> >> Does  the port on SUP - Cisco 7606S Chassis,6-slot,Redundant
> >> System,2RSP720-3C,2PS
> >>
> >> Support 100Mbps configurable port
> >
> > almost certainly not.  Why not use the RJ45 port on the SUP if it's
> free?
> >
> > Nick
> >
> 
> ___
> 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/


___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] SFP-GE-T

[Cosmin Lupu]

there are 2 ports on RSP720-3C:
- one SFP
- one combo - RJ45 and SFP

the combo port on RJ45 can be used for 100Mbps links

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 10:38 PM, jack daniels wrote:

> is there any RJ45 port on SUP. I thnk its not , only thig u can do is
> use SFP electrical or optical.
>
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 1:55 AM, Nick Hilliard  wrote:
> > On 13/01/2011 19:42, jack daniels wrote:
> >>
> >> Does  the port on SUP - Cisco 7606S Chassis,6-slot,Redundant
> >> System,2RSP720-3C,2PS
> >>
> >> Support 100Mbps configurable port
> >
> > almost certainly not.  Why not use the RJ45 port on the SUP if it's free?
> >
> > Nick
> >
>
> ___
> 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/
>
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Advice on Core Swithes / Routers

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 01:57:24PM +, Zoe O'Connell wrote:
> > A 6500/7600 will need more space, more power, and if all you need is 
> > 10/100, the much higher packet throughput for L3 stuff is likely not
> > necessary...
> 
> Just out of interest, do you not find that having switches uplinked at
> 1Gb/s unnecessarily limits the throughput of the solution? 

It really depends what the bandwidth requirements are - and if all switch
ports are only required to be 10/100, this doesn't sound too hard.  But
of course, if every single port is a separate VLAN and actually uses 50%
of the 100mbit, a 7301 won't be able to handle that...

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
   //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de


pgpQBm5CET8v4.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] SFP-GE-T

[jack daniels]

is there any RJ45 port on SUP. I thnk its not , only thig u can do is
use SFP electrical or optical.

On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 1:55 AM, Nick Hilliard  wrote:
> On 13/01/2011 19:42, jack daniels wrote:
>>
>> Does  the port on SUP - Cisco 7606S Chassis,6-slot,Redundant
>> System,2RSP720-3C,2PS
>>
>> Support 100Mbps configurable port
>
> almost certainly not.  Why not use the RJ45 port on the SUP if it's free?
>
> Nick
>

___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] SFP-GE-T

[Nick Hilliard]

On 13/01/2011 19:42, jack daniels wrote:

Does  the port on SUP - Cisco 7606S Chassis,6-slot,Redundant
System,2RSP720-3C,2PS

Support 100Mbps configurable port


almost certainly not.  Why not use the RJ45 port on the SUP if it's free?

Nick
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Advice on Core Swithes / Routers

[Łukasz Bromirski]

On 2011-01-13 10:23, Chris Knipe wrote:

Hi All,

I need a Layer 2&  3 device that is fully capable of BGP, OSPF, HRSP, IPSEC,
NAT, and Clustering/Load Balancing certain inbound services.  The device
needs to terminate various Serial Interfaces (up to 8 E1's) as well as
provide 10/100 Ethernet on a switching as well as routing level.

I was thinking of a small 6500 - but I'm not sure about Serial interfaces on
the 6500.  Is there any other devices that I could possibly look at.  I
would like to hear some recommendations.


Choose ASR 1k in the 1006 or 1013 option and fit any interfaces you
like into it.

--
"Everything will be okay in the end.  | Łukasz Bromirski
 If it's not okay, it's not the end." |  http://lukasz.bromirski.net
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] SFP-GE-T

[jack daniels]

Does  the port on SUP - Cisco 7606S Chassis,6-slot,Redundant
System,2RSP720-3C,2PS

Support 100Mbps configurable port

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Jared Mauch  wrote:
>
> On Jan 13, 2011, at 6:22 AM, jack daniels wrote:
>
>> I'm stuck in a problem :(
>> Please HELP  to suggest  Electrical (RJ45) SFP on -
>> 7600 platform , Line card WS-6724-SFP  which can be used as 100 Mbps.
>
> The 6724-SFP linecard does not support 100Mbps.
>
> I recommend using the RJ45 on the sup if it's open.
>
> - Jared
>

___
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/

[c-nsp] Nexus support for BIDI SFP's?

[sf]

Hi all,

Wondering if someone from Cisco can chime in on this one, since I can't
find any roadmap information on the Cisco site.

Will the Nexus 7000 NX-OS support BIDI SFP's in the future?  Specifically
on the F1 series?

Thanks,

-- Stephen


___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Catalyst 6509-E with dual supervisors, 6000W AC power supply with 120V inputs

[Matt Addison]

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:51, Greg Whynott  wrote:

>
> I know of no issues running a 6500 at 120,  aside from efficiency.
>
>
At 120 they're only 2900W PSUs, not 6000W.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps708/product_data_sheet0900aecd801c5c84.html

120V @ 16A (loaded 80% 20A circuit) == 1920W
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

[Chris Boyd]

On Jan 13, 2011, at 10:49 AM, Scott Granados wrote:

> Taking a dump is when I do my best thinking.;)


I used to work at a place where the documnetation they produced for their main 
product included an extensive list of crash dump codes.  The recommended action 
for many of the codes was "Take a dump and have a cup of coffee."

--Chris


___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] SPAN on 6500

[Tim Stevenson]

Arg, I've done it again. Don't bother clicking, this link is internal 
to cisco. Sorry about that.


The basic information you need though is in the user docs:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/datacenter/sw/4_0/nx-os/system_management/configuration/guide/sm_span.html#wp1184503

Hope that helps, sorry for the confusion.
Tim


At 08:42 AM 1/13/2011, Tim Stevenson muttered:

Hi Chuck,
You're correct, if you first configure the span dest as a .1q trunk, 
the SPANned traffic will go out vlan tagged (regardless of whether 
the original traffic actually had a vlan tag or not).


You might want to check this (old but still relevant) doc on cco:
http://bock-bock.cisco.com/~tstevens/White_Papers/virtual-span/virtual-span.pdf

Hope that helps,
Tim



At 08:16 AM 1/13/2011, Church, Charles muttered:


All,



I'm running into some issues with SPAN session limitations
on 6500 (SXI on a VSS pair).  After reading this doc:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst6500/ios/12.2SX/configu
ration/guide/span.html



I'm lead to believe that if I make the destination interface a trunk, a span
source of say VLANs 10 and 20 will leave the destination port with those
VLAN tags intact.  This appears to match the 'encapsulation replicate' that
is present on the 3560s.  My end goal is to use 2 3560 switches off of the
6500s to distribute SPAN sessions to 4 separate entities.  Switch A will get
a SPAN session off of the 6500 consisting of VLAN groups X and Y.  Switch B
will get a SPAN session off of the 6500 consisting of VLAN groups X and Z.
Switch A will span VLAN group X to a certain destination port, and group Y
to another.  Switch B will do a similar thing with VLAN groups X and Z.  I'm
assuming normal local SPAN.  I think the relies on the SPAN off of the 6500
to keep the VLAN tags intact.  Can anyone confirm if my assumption is
correct?



Thanks,



Chuck



___
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/





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.






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/

[c-nsp] 7600 Clock Redistribution

[Kevin Warwashana]

I am trying to gather clocking from a framed T1 and redistribute it to all
SIP's / SPA's within a 7600's.  Currently I have (2) 7600-SIP-200 with
multiple SPA-4XCT3/DS0 with the network-clock setup to use the built in
stratum 3 on each SIP.

I have read the below document, but am looking to verify a couple things.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/routers/ps368/products_configuration_
example09186a0080b2135f.shtml

It seems the SPA-8XCHT1/E can take BITS timing and redistribute it to the
backplane, but the SPA-4XCT3/DS0 can't recover clock from the backplane.  So
does that mean (1) SPA-8XCHT1/E1 would be required per SIP-200 to provide
clocking to the (3) other SPA-4XCT3/DS0 SPA's on the same SIP?

So the SPA-8XCHT1/E1 wouldn't take clocking and distributing it to all the
SIP's/SPA's in the same chassis?  

If that is the case then what is recommended?  SONET clocking isn't really
an option since the router only does channelized DS3 and we have plenty of
devices that can distribute stratum 2 BITS.

Thanks,
Kevin



___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Catalyst 6509-E with dual supervisors, 6000W AC power supply with 120V inputs

[Greg Whynott]

the GE cards use about 325 watts each,  sup720 @340watts,  IDSM not sure 
probably about 300 too.

if your power supplies produce 6000 watts each,  you will be fine and be able 
to run in redundant power mode.

I know of no issues running a 6500 at 120,  aside from efficiency.


-g


On Jan 13, 2011, at 11:29 AM, Ramcharan, Vijay A wrote:

> Are there folks out there who have been forced to run their Catalyst
> 6500-E switches on 120V circuits?
>
> Other than the expected lower power output and the inability to fully
> populate the switches (depending on model), are there any issues with
> running on the 120V circuits?
>
>
>
> Expected configuration is as follows:
>
> 6509-E with dual VS-720-10G Supervisors
>
> 3 x 6748-GE-TX line cards
>
> 1 x IDSM2
>
> 2 x 6000W AC PS, each with dual 120V circuits
>
>
>
> According to Cisco's Power Calculator, the switch should be able to run
> in redundant power mode with the above configuration with less than 80%
> utilization on one power supply.
>
>
>
> Thank you for any feedback.
>
>
>
> Vijay Ramcharan
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> 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/


--

This message and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged 
information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or 
distribution by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally 
intended is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, 
please contact the sender and delete all copies. Opinions, conclusions or other 
information contained in this message may not be that of the organization.

___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

[Scott Granados]

Taking a dump is when I do my best thinking.;)


On Jan 13, 2011, at 1:09 AM, Ziv Leyes wrote:

> EXACTLY!!!
> 
> Like concentrating ONLY on it... (healthiest)
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Hooper [mailto:dhoo...@emerge.net.au] 
> Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 9:57 AM
> To: Ziv Leyes; 'cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net'
> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?
> 
> I can think of so many more exciting & better things to do while taking a 
> dump.
> 
> -Dan
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net 
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ziv Leyes
> Sent: Thursday, 13 January 2011 3:30 PM
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?
> 
> Yeah, should be very useful to be able to open a TAC case while taking a 
> dump...
> 
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net 
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of John Neiberger
> Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 6:16 PM
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?
> 
> I don't know about everyone else, but how cool would it be to have TAC case 
> management tools on our smart phones?
> 
> I would absolutely love a TAC app on my Android phone. That would be 
> extremely useful. I'm surprised out doesn't already exist.
> 
> What do you all think?
> ___
> 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/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp 
> Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The information contained in this e-mail message and its attachments is 
> confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or 
> entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
> this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the 
> sender, and then delete the message from your computer.  Thank you!
> 
>  This mail was sent via Mail-SeCure System.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp 
> Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp 
> Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The information contained in this e-mail message and its attachments is 
> confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or 
> entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or 
> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
> this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the 
> sender, and then delete the message from your computer.  Thank you!
> 
>  This mail was sent via Mail-SeCure System.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
> viruses.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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/


___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] SPAN on 6500

[Tim Stevenson]

Hi Chuck,
You're correct, if you first configure the span dest as a .1q trunk, 
the SPANned traffic will go out vlan tagged (regardless of whether 
the original traffic actually had a vlan tag or not).


You might want to check this (old but still relevant) doc on cco:
http://bock-bock.cisco.com/~tstevens/White_Papers/virtual-span/virtual-span.pdf

Hope that helps,
Tim



At 08:16 AM 1/13/2011, Church, Charles muttered:


All,



I'm running into some issues with SPAN session limitations
on 6500 (SXI on a VSS pair).  After reading this doc:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst6500/ios/12.2SX/configu
ration/guide/span.html



I'm lead to believe that if I make the destination interface a trunk, a span
source of say VLANs 10 and 20 will leave the destination port with those
VLAN tags intact.  This appears to match the 'encapsulation replicate' that
is present on the 3560s.  My end goal is to use 2 3560 switches off of the
6500s to distribute SPAN sessions to 4 separate entities.  Switch A will get
a SPAN session off of the 6500 consisting of VLAN groups X and Y.  Switch B
will get a SPAN session off of the 6500 consisting of VLAN groups X and Z.
Switch A will span VLAN group X to a certain destination port, and group Y
to another.  Switch B will do a similar thing with VLAN groups X and Z.  I'm
assuming normal local SPAN.  I think the relies on the SPAN off of the 6500
to keep the VLAN tags intact.  Can anyone confirm if my assumption is
correct?



Thanks,



Chuck



___
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/





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/

[c-nsp] Catalyst 6509-E with dual supervisors, 6000W AC power supply with 120V inputs

[Ramcharan, Vijay A]

Are there folks out there who have been forced to run their Catalyst
6500-E switches on 120V circuits? 

Other than the expected lower power output and the inability to fully
populate the switches (depending on model), are there any issues with
running on the 120V circuits? 

 

Expected configuration is as follows: 

6509-E with dual VS-720-10G Supervisors

3 x 6748-GE-TX line cards

1 x IDSM2

2 x 6000W AC PS, each with dual 120V circuits 

 

According to Cisco's Power Calculator, the switch should be able to run
in redundant power mode with the above configuration with less than 80%
utilization on one power supply. 

 

Thank you for any feedback. 

 

Vijay Ramcharan 

 

 

___
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/

[c-nsp] SPAN on 6500

[Church, Charles]

All,

 

I'm running into some issues with SPAN session limitations
on 6500 (SXI on a VSS pair).  After reading this doc:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst6500/ios/12.2SX/configu
ration/guide/span.html

 

I'm lead to believe that if I make the destination interface a trunk, a span
source of say VLANs 10 and 20 will leave the destination port with those
VLAN tags intact.  This appears to match the 'encapsulation replicate' that
is present on the 3560s.  My end goal is to use 2 3560 switches off of the
6500s to distribute SPAN sessions to 4 separate entities.  Switch A will get
a SPAN session off of the 6500 consisting of VLAN groups X and Y.  Switch B
will get a SPAN session off of the 6500 consisting of VLAN groups X and Z.
Switch A will span VLAN group X to a certain destination port, and group Y
to another.  Switch B will do a similar thing with VLAN groups X and Z.  I'm
assuming normal local SPAN.  I think the relies on the SPAN off of the 6500
to keep the VLAN tags intact.  Can anyone confirm if my assumption is
correct?

 

Thanks,

 

Chuck 

 



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Advice on Core Swithes / Routers

[Benjamin Lovell]

It really sounds like you are overloading the WAN router and core switch roles 
onto one device. I would suggest separating them out. For a core switch a 6500 
with an ACE module should fit the bill. For a WAN router it would depend on the 
amount of traffic you want to pass. Could be anywhere from a 2900 up to an 
ASR1K. 

The cost perspective of a 2nd device should not be bad if you consider that you 
will need SIP/SPA for E1s and another for the crypto module on the 6500

-Ben


On Jan 13, 2011, at 4:23 AM, Chris Knipe wrote:

> Hi All,
> 
> I need a Layer 2 & 3 device that is fully capable of BGP, OSPF, HRSP, IPSEC,
> NAT, and Clustering/Load Balancing certain inbound services.  The device
> needs to terminate various Serial Interfaces (up to 8 E1's) as well as
> provide 10/100 Ethernet on a switching as well as routing level.
> 
> I was thinking of a small 6500 - but I'm not sure about Serial interfaces on
> the 6500.  Is there any other devices that I could possibly look at.  I
> would like to hear some recommendations.
> 
> -- 
> 
> Regards,
> Chris Knipe
> ___
> 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/


___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Advice on Core Swithes / Routers

[Zoe O'Connell]

On 13/01/11 10:10, Gert Doering wrote:
> Serials on a 6500 require flexwan + PA, and the flexwan is expensive
> (and I seem to remember that it's end of support, but that might be the
> flexwan1 while the flexwan2 is still supported).  I'd not go there - the
> 6500 is a great platform for ethernet stuff, but WAN stuff has always been
> "bolted to the side", with mixed-quality software support, etc.
>
> With a 7301+2960S, you can get up to 48 switched ports in 2RU, and the
> 7301 will actually do a better job at BGP+OSPF than the 6500 (because
> that's question of CPU, and the 7300 is faster).
>
> A 6500/7600 will need more space, more power, and if all you need is 
> 10/100, the much higher packet throughput for L3 stuff is likely not
> necessary...

Just out of interest, do you not find that having switches uplinked at
1Gb/s unnecessarily limits the throughput of the solution? Having 48
ports but only being able to guarantee provision of 500Mb/s off it is
somewhat limiting. 6500/7600s have worked well for this if you're only
using Serial for access and not core circuits - we have stacks of old
7200VXRs we can use for that.

For future small data centre deployments, the ASR1002s look nice due to
their ability to handle 10GigE, (Enough for two diverse links to other
core devices plus a 10GigE link for local Layer 2) we've not had need to
look at anything larger for a few years now.
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] SVI MTU on 6509

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 06:08:20PM -0600, Justin Krejci wrote:
> What is the difference between the following as I note they have
> different minimums by 4 bytes? It looks if i set the "svi interface mtu"
> the IP MTU is increased as well which I am guessing cannot (or should
> not) be lower than the "svi interface" mtu. Is there any reason in
> changing ip mtu separately from the svi interface mtu especially given
> that only ipv4 is currently in use?

If you only have IPv4 in use right now, interface MTU and IPv4 MTU will
effectively do the same (IPv4 MTU defaults to interface MTU if not
set).

It will make a difference if you want to run a bigger MPLS MTU than IPv4 
MTU, for example - so you'd set the interface MTU to the maximum needed,
and then IPv4 MTU to a lower value (making sure it matches for all
devices on the same network, etc.)

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
   //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de


pgpBMIzokvF4W.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] SFP-GE-T

[Phil Mayers]

On 13/01/11 11:22, jack daniels wrote:

Hi Guys,

I'm stuck in a problem :(
Please HELP  to suggest  Electrical (RJ45) SFP on -
7600 platform , Line card WS-6724-SFP  which can be used as 100 Mbps.


It's not possible.
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] SFP-GE-T

[Jared Mauch]

On Jan 13, 2011, at 6:22 AM, jack daniels wrote:

> I'm stuck in a problem :(
> Please HELP  to suggest  Electrical (RJ45) SFP on -
> 7600 platform , Line card WS-6724-SFP  which can be used as 100 Mbps.

The 6724-SFP linecard does not support 100Mbps.

I recommend using the RJ45 on the sup if it's open.

- Jared
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] SFP-GE-T

[Elmar K. Bins]

jckdaniel...@gmail.com (jack daniels) wrote:

> Hi Guys,
> 
> I'm stuck in a problem :(
> Please HELP  to suggest  Electrical (RJ45) SFP on -
> 7600 platform , Line card WS-6724-SFP  which can be used as 100 Mbps.

Do I understand correctly that you're trying to use SFP-GE-T in that
board and it does not work at all? (Try SFP-GLC-T) Or does it work,
but not for FastEthernet-fixed-config?

You really might want to add a few more words to your list email ;)

Yours,
Elmi.

-- 

"Machen Sie sich erst einmal unbeliebt. Dann werden Sie auch ernstgenommen."
 (Konrad Adenauer)

--[ ELMI-RIPE ]---

___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] SFP-GE-T

[jack daniels]

Hi Guys,

I'm stuck in a problem :(
Please HELP  to suggest  Electrical (RJ45) SFP on -
7600 platform , Line card WS-6724-SFP  which can be used as 100 Mbps.

Regards
Jack

On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 6:53 PM, jack daniels  wrote:
> S764AIK9-12233SRE
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 6:53 PM, jack daniels  wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> CUurent IOS I'm using is Cisco 7600-RSP720 IOS ADVANCED IP SERVICES SSH
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 6:51 PM, jack daniels  wrote:
>>> Hi Group,
>>>
>>> Please suggest can I configure SFP-GE-T as 100 Mbps on 7600 . Line
>>> CARD is WS-X6724-SFP
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Jack
>>>
>>
>
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Advice on Core Swithes / Routers

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 12:52:04PM +0200, Chris Knipe wrote:
> The 6500 are legacy and thus needs to stay.  I am aware of the FlexWAN and
> it's not a problem getting it.
> 
> The problem that I have is that I am unsure which SPA's in the FlexWAN is
> supported and will work on the 6500 platform.  

SPAs will not be supported at all in FlexWAN :-) - SPAs are for SIPs,
FlexWAN will eat PAs.

> The SPA-4XT-SERIAL is
> precisely what I need and want to put in my 6500 - but I've seen varied
> results from google in terms of whether it does, or does not, work with the
> FlexWAN on the 6500.

I'm fairly sure it won't even physically fit.

... but if you have a FlexWAN anyway, there's nice 8-port PAs for
E1s (PA-MC-8E1) or X21 (PA-8T).


The other thing about "IPSEC on 6500 being a pain *or* very expensive"
still holds.  Forgot that in my original mail.

gert

-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
   //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de


pgp1KorgWnlyj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Advice on Core Swithes / Routers

[Alexander Clouter]

Phil Mayers  wrote:
>
> SLB on the 6500 (as opposed to with an ACE module) has caveats; it's 
> slow (as initial packets are punted to CPU) and Cisco don't really 
> support it AFAICT.
>
SLB on our 6500 gave us more trouble than good; it would randomly stop 
working and was a right pain to diagnose (is any load-balancing 
reliable, compliant and easy to diagnose?).

I moved to anycast'ing which has worked out far better for us and is a 
far simplier system to understand:

http://www.digriz.org.uk/ha-ospf-anycast

Cheers

-- 
Alexander Clouter
.sigmonster says: Death is nature's way of telling you to slow down.

___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Advice on Core Swithes / Routers

[Chris Knipe]

>
> Serials on a 6500 require flexwan + PA, and the flexwan is expensive
> (and I seem to remember that it's end of support, but that might be the
> flexwan1 while the flexwan2 is still supported).  I'd not go there - the
> 6500 is a great platform for ethernet stuff, but WAN stuff has always been
> "bolted to the side", with mixed-quality software support, etc.
>

The 6500 are legacy and thus needs to stay.  I am aware of the FlexWAN and
it's not a problem getting it.

The problem that I have is that I am unsure which SPA's in the FlexWAN is
supported and will work on the 6500 platform.  The SPA-4XT-SERIAL is
precisely what I need and want to put in my 6500 - but I've seen varied
results from google in terms of whether it does, or does not, work with the
FlexWAN on the 6500.

Even the documentation on Cisco is conflicting on whether or not the SPA
will be supported... :(

Hopefully, again - someone can shed some light for me.  It is rather urgent.

--
Chris.
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Advice on Core Swithes / Routers

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 11:23:47AM +0200, Chris Knipe wrote:
> I need a Layer 2 & 3 device that is fully capable of BGP, OSPF, HRSP, IPSEC,
> NAT, and Clustering/Load Balancing certain inbound services.  The device
> needs to terminate various Serial Interfaces (up to 8 E1's) as well as
> provide 10/100 Ethernet on a switching as well as routing level.

7301, PA-MC-8E1, 2960S tacked to it for the "switching" side...

> I was thinking of a small 6500 - but I'm not sure about Serial interfaces on
> the 6500.  Is there any other devices that I could possibly look at.  I
> would like to hear some recommendations.

Serials on a 6500 require flexwan + PA, and the flexwan is expensive
(and I seem to remember that it's end of support, but that might be the
flexwan1 while the flexwan2 is still supported).  I'd not go there - the
6500 is a great platform for ethernet stuff, but WAN stuff has always been
"bolted to the side", with mixed-quality software support, etc.

With a 7301+2960S, you can get up to 48 switched ports in 2RU, and the
7301 will actually do a better job at BGP+OSPF than the 6500 (because
that's question of CPU, and the 7300 is faster).

A 6500/7600 will need more space, more power, and if all you need is 
10/100, the much higher packet throughput for L3 stuff is likely not
necessary...

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
   //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de


pgpmowM1L2qQk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Advice on Core Swithes / Routers

[Phil Mayers]

On 01/13/2011 09:23 AM, Chris Knipe wrote:

Hi All,

I need a Layer 2&  3 device that is fully capable of BGP, OSPF, HRSP, IPSEC,
NAT, and Clustering/Load Balancing certain inbound services.  The device
needs to terminate various Serial Interfaces (up to 8 E1's) as well as
provide 10/100 Ethernet on a switching as well as routing level.

I was thinking of a small 6500 - but I'm not sure about Serial interfaces on


IPSec on 6500 is complex. You need SPA (maybe ES?) linecards to do it in 
hardware, and you *don't* want to do it in software.


SLB on the 6500 (as opposed to with an ACE module) has caveats; it's 
slow (as initial packets are punted to CPU) and Cisco don't really 
support it AFAICT.


Same applied to NAT on the 6500.


the 6500.  Is there any other devices that I could possibly look at.  I
would like to hear some recommendations.



Give up on the idea of using one device. You might be better off with a 
layer2 switch and a real router with crypto module (maybe an ASR100x). 
I'm not sure about the SLB - you might end up needing a 3rd device.

___
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/

[c-nsp] Advice on Core Swithes / Routers

[Chris Knipe]

Hi All,

I need a Layer 2 & 3 device that is fully capable of BGP, OSPF, HRSP, IPSEC,
NAT, and Clustering/Load Balancing certain inbound services.  The device
needs to terminate various Serial Interfaces (up to 8 E1's) as well as
provide 10/100 Ethernet on a switching as well as routing level.

I was thinking of a small 6500 - but I'm not sure about Serial interfaces on
the 6500.  Is there any other devices that I could possibly look at.  I
would like to hear some recommendations.

-- 

Regards,
Chris Knipe
___
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/

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

[Ziv Leyes]

EXACTLY!!!

Like concentrating ONLY on it... (healthiest)

-Original Message-
From: Daniel Hooper [mailto:dhoo...@emerge.net.au] 
Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2011 9:57 AM
To: Ziv Leyes; 'cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net'
Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

I can think of so many more exciting & better things to do while taking a dump.

-Dan

-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net 
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ziv Leyes
Sent: Thursday, 13 January 2011 3:30 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

Yeah, should be very useful to be able to open a TAC case while taking a dump...



-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net 
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of John Neiberger
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 6:16 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco Android or iphone apps?

I don't know about everyone else, but how cool would it be to have TAC case 
management tools on our smart phones?

I would absolutely love a TAC app on my Android phone. That would be extremely 
useful. I'm surprised out doesn't already exist.

What do you all think?
___
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/

 
 

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp 
Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.





The information contained in this e-mail message and its attachments is 
confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity 
named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you 
are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender, and then 
delete the message from your computer.  Thank you!

 This mail was sent via Mail-SeCure System.



 
 

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp 
Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.





___
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/

 
 

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp 
Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.





The information contained in this e-mail message and its attachments is 
confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity 
named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you 
are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication 
in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender, and then 
delete the message from your computer.  Thank you!

 This mail was sent via Mail-SeCure System.



 
 

This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
viruses.





___
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/