Re: [c-nsp] off-topic NMS Suggestion

[Tim Stevenson]

I'll put a plug in for PRTG, which personally I've been using to run 
visual demos of some switching features for our product; but I've 
been quite impressed with the depth of capability (custom scripts 
with XML, full SNMP with custom MIB compilation, NFv5/v9 collection, 
auto device discovery & sensor creation, and tons of other stuff). 
The map function, which allows you to overlay live data/graphs on a 
static image (network topology, geo map, etc) is pretty cool.


They have an operational demo here:
https://prtg.paessler.com/group.htm?id=0

Hope that helps,
Tim


At 06:41 PM 5/24/2011, Dan Letkeman mumbled:


Intermapper has worked well for me for the past few years, easy to
setup, not expensive, and has the ability to make a nice graphical map
of all your devices any which way you please.

Dan.

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 9:38 PM, omar parihuana
 wrote:
> Hi List,
>
> Please could you suggest me a NMS for WAN/LAN? the WAN is a MPLS/VPN (300
> remote offices)  and the Switching is a campus LAN (aprox 1000 Network
> Devices) and three remote buildings (aprox Network 200 devices in each
> building). Before I tried Cisco Works but I faced some issues; HP Openview
> was difficult also. We need a easy web interface for monitoring and
> reporting (unfortunately no open source solutions are accepted).
>
> Thank you for your suggestions.
>
> Rgds.
>
> --
> Omar E.P.T
> -
> Certified Networking Professionals make better Connections!
> ___
> 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/





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/

Re: [c-nsp] Catalyst 6524 rate limit per port/vlan

[Mark Tinka]

On Saturday, May 21, 2011 05:32:24 AM Pavel Dimow wrote:

> I'am thinking of using CAT6524 as access switches for our
> pure l2vpn customers. I have started reading about rate
> limiting capabilities of those switches but it I can't
> find a way to do a per port or per vlan rate limit. With
> MQC I can limit the speed in inbound but not in outbound
> direction. Is there any better way to do it? I don't
> understand what is the problem with
> outbound rate limit for Cisco (and Juniper) switches? Is
> it architecture or something else and how come that
> there is no problem for rate limit on routers (even the
> smallest one).

I would look at Cisco's ME3600X/3800X for this deployment. I 
wouldn't waste my time on an ME6524, given the capabilities 
and price of the ME3600X/3800X.

Note that egress policing in this platform is not yet 
available in the software (but the hardware is built to 
support it). This should be out towards the end of 2011.

Cheers,

Mark.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
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] Routing IPv6 with IS-IS in NX-OS

[Mark Tinka]

On Monday, May 23, 2011 02:25:26 AM Nitzan Tzelniker wrote:

> In the case of the ME3800X its a new platform but the
> nexus is three years old and it have ipv6 from the
> begining but for some reason they didnt integrate these
> two new TLV.

Right, but platforms like the 3560 and 3750 are older than 
the Nexus yet, and also have no v6 support for IS-IS.

Either customers don't want it, or someone at Cisco thinks 
it isn't important to have in these systems.

Cheers,

Mark.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
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 Router Traffic Thresholds

[Mark Tinka]

On Saturday, May 21, 2011 10:06:40 PM Pete Lumbis wrote:

> These numbers are going to be highly variable on the ASR
> and 3900. Since both of these are software based
> platforms (the ASR is a little different than
> traditional software platforms) it depends on what
> features are enabled and the packet profile.

Ummh, not quite sure what you mean.

The ASR (be it the 1000 or 9000 series) is a hardware-based 
platform. 

There's nothing "software-forwarding" about the ASR family, 
as of today anyway.

Cheers,

Mark.


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
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] off-topic NMS Suggestion

[Dan Letkeman]

Intermapper has worked well for me for the past few years, easy to
setup, not expensive, and has the ability to make a nice graphical map
of all your devices any which way you please.

Dan.

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 9:38 PM, omar parihuana
 wrote:
> Hi List,
>
> Please could you suggest me a NMS for WAN/LAN? the WAN is a MPLS/VPN (300
> remote offices)  and the Switching is a campus LAN (aprox 1000 Network
> Devices) and three remote buildings (aprox Network 200 devices in each
> building). Before I tried Cisco Works but I faced some issues; HP Openview
> was difficult also. We need a easy web interface for monitoring and
> reporting (unfortunately no open source solutions are accepted).
>
> Thank you for your suggestions.
>
> Rgds.
>
> --
> Omar E.P.T
> -
> Certified Networking Professionals make better Connections!
> ___
> 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] IPv6 RA undesireable

[Phil Mayers]

On 05/24/2011 09:59 PM, Chris Conn wrote:

Hello,

I have an 1811 that is behaving strangely; we have a few "routers"
including this one for which we do not want to send any RAs or reply to
sollicited RAs.


Do you have:

ipv6 nd prefix default no-advertise

?
___
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] Cisco IGX

[Ravi Patwari]

Hi,

 

I have been using a cisco IGX 8430 since last 6 years.

 

Recently the trunk line on a NTM card went down and thereafter whatever I
did, it would not come back up. In the end I thought that a reboot might fix
the problem, but once rebooted, it now does not recognize any of the other
cards as well. It keeps showing either the front cards or the back cards or
both are missing on all the slots except the NPM slots.

 

Would appreciate if to know if anybody faced a similar problem and any
possible fix to this.

 

Regards

Ravi

 

___
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] traffic not passing between Cisco 3750G and & Cisco 7206vxr

[Dale Shaw]

Hi Mike,

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 1:56 AM, Michael K. Smith - Adhost
 wrote:
>
> Um, bad cable?  No IP addresses?  Not sure what kind of connection problem 
> you are having.

I don't think his IOS is post-rapture ready.

Cheers,
Dale

___
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] IPv6 RA undesireable

[Chris Conn]

Hello,

I have an 1811 that is behaving strangely; we have a few "routers" 
including this one for which we do not want to send any RAs or reply to 
sollicited RAs.


They are all configured essentially as:

interface FastEthernet0
 ipv6 address 2001:2b8::2/64
 ipv6 enable
 ipv6 nd ra suppress


The IOS is 12.4.T4 on the whole lot, and when a IPv6 device is connected 
to the network, the 7200VXR series do not answer the sollicited RA; 
however the 1811 will answer and the device will configure itself a 
prefix with SLAAC.


I have looked through the bug toolkit and found nothing, anyone care to 
point out my failure or what did I miss in the bug tool?


Thanks,

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] OC-48 transport over Cisco 6500

[Mack McBride]

On the 6500 you can only do POS so if they want something else it isn't going 
to work.
If you are using the POS interface as an xconnect end-point it should do what 
you want.
TDM does not work over most MPLS without significant buffering in any case.

Mack

From: Tim Jackson [mailto:jackson@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2011 10:44 AM
To: FF
Cc: Mack McBride; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] OC-48 transport over Cisco 6500

They'll notice..

Assuming they're doing TDM or something besides PoS over it, it won't look the 
same at all.. The PoS interfaces are STS-48c only..

Maybe if they're doing just PoS it might work, but who uses PoS on OC-48 
anymore? Cheaper to do 10G...

--
Tim
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:38 AM, FF 
mailto:fusionf...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Thanks for responding. I'm looking at something like this:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/modules/ps2831/ps4370/product_data_sheet09186a0080092241.html

Will someone connecting to this for OC-48 transport between two
locations with MPLS encapsulation (xconnect) notice anything different
via a normal mux port? I think what you're saying is, "no". :)

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Mack McBride 
mailto:mack.mcbr...@viawest.com>> wrote:
> The POS looks like a standard 6500 layer 3 port with of course the added POS 
> commands.
> This means standard MPLS commands should work.
> The older POS cards lack some of the functionality of the newer cards.
> Someone may have more information if you provide the exact line card.
>
> Mack McBride
> Network Architect
>
> -Original Message-
> From: 
> cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net 
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net]
>  On Behalf Of FF
> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2011 9:25 PM
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] OC-48 transport over Cisco 6500
>
> If I'm trying to transport OC-48 between two customer locations via
> MPLS on a Cisco 6500...
>
> Would simple MPLS/xconnect work using the appropriate OC-48-OSM on
> each side? [i.e., will the OC-48-OSM look like a traditional SONET
> interface such as one would see from a 15454 or similar mux to the
> customer equipment?]
>
> thanks in advance,
>
> --
>
> FF
> ___
> 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/
>


--
FF

___
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] OC-48 transport over Cisco 6500

[Tim Jackson]

They'll notice..

Assuming they're doing TDM or something besides PoS over it, it won't look
the same at all.. The PoS interfaces are STS-48c only..

Maybe if they're doing just PoS it might work, but who uses PoS on OC-48
anymore? Cheaper to do 10G...

--
Tim

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:38 AM, FF  wrote:

> Thanks for responding. I'm looking at something like this:
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/modules/ps2831/ps4370/product_data_sheet09186a0080092241.html
>
> Will someone connecting to this for OC-48 transport between two
> locations with MPLS encapsulation (xconnect) notice anything different
> via a normal mux port? I think what you're saying is, "no". :)
>
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Mack McBride 
> wrote:
> > The POS looks like a standard 6500 layer 3 port with of course the added
> POS commands.
> > This means standard MPLS commands should work.
> > The older POS cards lack some of the functionality of the newer cards.
> > Someone may have more information if you provide the exact line card.
> >
> > Mack McBride
> > Network Architect
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:
> cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of FF
> > Sent: Monday, May 23, 2011 9:25 PM
> > To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > Subject: [c-nsp] OC-48 transport over Cisco 6500
> >
> > If I'm trying to transport OC-48 between two customer locations via
> > MPLS on a Cisco 6500...
> >
> > Would simple MPLS/xconnect work using the appropriate OC-48-OSM on
> > each side? [i.e., will the OC-48-OSM look like a traditional SONET
> > interface such as one would see from a 15454 or similar mux to the
> > customer equipment?]
> >
> > thanks in advance,
> >
> > --
> >
> > FF
> > ___
> > 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/
> >
>
>
>
> --
> FF
>
> ___
> 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] OC-48 transport over Cisco 6500

[FF]

Thanks for responding. I'm looking at something like this:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/modules/ps2831/ps4370/product_data_sheet09186a0080092241.html

Will someone connecting to this for OC-48 transport between two
locations with MPLS encapsulation (xconnect) notice anything different
via a normal mux port? I think what you're saying is, "no". :)

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Mack McBride  wrote:
> The POS looks like a standard 6500 layer 3 port with of course the added POS 
> commands.
> This means standard MPLS commands should work.
> The older POS cards lack some of the functionality of the newer cards.
> Someone may have more information if you provide the exact line card.
>
> Mack McBride
> Network Architect
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net 
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of FF
> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2011 9:25 PM
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] OC-48 transport over Cisco 6500
>
> If I'm trying to transport OC-48 between two customer locations via
> MPLS on a Cisco 6500...
>
> Would simple MPLS/xconnect work using the appropriate OC-48-OSM on
> each side? [i.e., will the OC-48-OSM look like a traditional SONET
> interface such as one would see from a 15454 or similar mux to the
> customer equipment?]
>
> thanks in advance,
>
> --
>
> FF
> ___
> 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/
>



-- 
FF

___
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] OC-48 transport over Cisco 6500

[Mack McBride]

The POS looks like a standard 6500 layer 3 port with of course the added POS 
commands.
This means standard MPLS commands should work.
The older POS cards lack some of the functionality of the newer cards.
Someone may have more information if you provide the exact line card.

Mack McBride
Network Architect

-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net 
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of FF
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2011 9:25 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] OC-48 transport over Cisco 6500

If I'm trying to transport OC-48 between two customer locations via
MPLS on a Cisco 6500...

Would simple MPLS/xconnect work using the appropriate OC-48-OSM on
each side? [i.e., will the OC-48-OSM look like a traditional SONET
interface such as one would see from a 15454 or similar mux to the
customer equipment?]

thanks in advance,

--

FF
___
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] traffic not passing between Cisco 3750G and & Cisco 7206vxr

[Michael K. Smith - Adhost]

> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
> boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Md. Jahangir Hossain
> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2011 2:39 AM
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] traffic not passing between Cisco 3750G and & Cisco 7206vxr
> 
> Dear all;
> 
> 
> 
> i faced a packet passing problem between  Cisco 3750G and & Cisco
> 7206vxr.Switch and router point to point connected also shown switch
> interface is up.
> 
> 
> Cisco Switch;
> 
> Cisco WS-C3750G-24PS (PowerPC405) processor (revision F0) with
> 118784K/12280K bytes of memory.
> Last reset from power-on
> 3 Virtual Ethernet interfaces
> 28 Gigabit Ethernet interfaces
> 
> Port configuration:
> 
> interface GigabitEthernet1/0/1
>  description PP2.CORE
>  power inline never
>  switchport access vlan 102
>  switchport mode access
>  load-interval 30
>  speed 100
>  duplex full
> 
> Router Port Config :
> 
> interface FastEthernet1/0
>  no ip redirects
>  no ip unreachables
>  no ip proxy-arp
>  load-interval 30
>  duplex full
> 
> Router Information:
> 
> Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software
> IOS (tm) 7200 Software (C7200-IS-M), Version 12.3(1a), RELEASE SOFTWARE
> (fc1)
> 
> Image text-base: 0x60008954, data-base: 0x61C02000
> 
> ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 12.1(2710:044039) [nlaw-121E_npeb
> 117], DEVELOPMENT SOFTWARE
> BOOTLDR: 7200 Software (C7200-BOOT-M), Version 12.0(13)S, EARLY
> DEPLOYMENT RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
> 
> System image file is "sup-slot0:/c7200-is-mz.123-1a.bin"
> cisco 7204VXR (NPE225) processor (revision A) with 245760K/16384K bytes of
> memory.
> R527x CPU at 262Mhz, Implementation 40, Rev 10.0, 2048KB L2 Cache
> 4 slot VXR midplane, Version 2.1
> 

Um, bad cable?  No IP addresses?  Not sure what kind of connection problem you 
are having.

Mike

___
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/