Is there 12.2(18)SXFsomething ios that will boot on 6524 ?
CCO offers only ZU2 and SXH
There is none. Olivier made an mistake.
There is only ZU2 and SXH.
I took it a second thought about the whole issue and I will try to test SXH
(not SXH1). ZU2 seems to lack some of the functionalities that
Hello!
Is there 12.2(18)SXFsomething ios that will boot on 6524 ?
CCO offers only ZU2 and SXH
Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) wrote:
Mateusz Blaszczyk wrote on Monday, February 25, 2008 2:00 PM:
List,
I would like to report a problem with ME6524s that I have in the
testlab network at the
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 12:45:21PM +0200, Ziv Leyes wrote:
Is anybody willing to check this out and give an answer please???
There seems to be a misunderstanding on what cisco-nsp is...
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
Mark Tinka wrote:
On Wednesday 27 February 2008, Darryl Dunkin wrote:
If you're using /32 masks for your loopbacks (as you
should): router ospf
redistribute connected subnets
The key part is to define 'subnets'.
I'd advise against using 'redistribute' to announce any kind
of
SHAMELESS BUMP!!!
Is anybody willing to check this out and give an answer please???
Thanks,
Ziv
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ziv Leyes
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 1:08 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Weird
Hi,
I have a network with 1 input side, 2 output sides, NAT all
around. If things go out the A output side, everything should run
normally. However, if things go out the B output side, I need to :
1) Forward 0.0.0.0/0 port 80 to B port 87
2) Forward 0.0.0.0/0 port 53 to internal IP
Hi Ziv,
On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 14:49 +0200, Ziv Leyes wrote:
Hey Gert,
I know what cisco-nsp is, I know it's not an official Cisco TAC, and
I'm not expecting anybody to act like that, I just find it funny that
there's nobody that can tell something about it... I've been reading
all the
Mateusz Błaszczyk wrote:
I took it a second thought about the whole issue and I will try to test SXH
(not SXH1). ZU2 seems to lack some of the functionalities that I ws hoping
to use (eg. MUX-UNI)
SXH also removed some of the functionality many were using. See past
threads about BFD on SVIs.
Can you check for the crashinfo file on bootflash: and also provide:
sh ver
sh stack
Rodney
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 12:45:21PM +0200, Ziv Leyes wrote:
SHAMELESS BUMP!!!
Is anybody willing to check this out and give an answer please???
Thanks,
Ziv
-Original Message-
From:
Hi,
I believe the initial poster was talking about normal loopbacks- ther kind
you#39;d use for network management, ibgp peering, or perhaps anycast. In
that case, you needn#39;t be worried about spf churn, because they#39;re
yours, and not going down, and you would want the routes generated
Hi,
I believe the initial poster was talking about normal loopbacks- ther kind
you#39;d use for network management, ibgp peering, or perhaps anycast. In
that case, you needn#39;t be worried about spf churn, because they#39;re
yours, and not going down, and you would want the routes generated
Hey Rodney,
I don't have any further information because I can't access the router even
with console, it keeps running those weird lines about the ECC L2. In a couple
of weeks I'll be at the site and I'll have the chance to put my hands on it so
I'll try to get some more info, I hope I will be
Quoting Matyas Koszik [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
You may want to try
bgp bestpath as-path multipath-relax
to achieve load-sharing accross the providers, with different (but equal
length) as-paths. (Works for me like a charm in a situation similar to
yours.)
Thanks, but it didn't seem to work for
Anyone,
I've got an issue with a 2650 running 12.4(18) Adv Sec and using IOS
FW. It's doing NAT, and that portion works fine. The problem is the
CBAC isn't opening the holes in the inbound ACL on the exterior
interface like it's supposed to. IP Inspect is enabled on the outside
interface
On Wednesday 27 February 2008, Phil Mayers wrote:
I think that's probably a bit dramatic (no offence
intended). We've used redis connected / static for
customer routes (edge networks) for quite a while now
here with no problesm; initially in a VRF-lite model:
If you read further on in my
On Wednesday 27 February 2008, David Barak wrote:
I prefer to use passive default, and then only enable the
correct interfaces.
Agree!
I also like the fact the IOS has introduced interface-level
commands in 12.4 to enable OSPFv2 - that's definitely
welcome.
Mark.
signature.asc
Mark Tinka wrote:
On Wednesday 27 February 2008, Phil Mayers wrote:
I think that's probably a bit dramatic (no offence
intended). We've used redis connected / static for
customer routes (edge networks) for quite a while now
here with no problesm; initially in a VRF-lite model:
If you
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Phil Mayers wrote:
Yes I read that, but I am having a hard time seeing what
the fundamental difference is between redis connected
inside a VRF versus not (for the same protocol). Surely
if one is bad, the other is?
Because a vanilla VPN VRF has a very limited
Ziv and Cisco NSP community, I have never seen any person refused an
answer or reply based on their name or religion. This is a great list where
everyone who can help does. Sometimes people just don't have an answer. That
is the only reason I can think o you not getting a response to your
Trying to setup a VTI IPSEC VPN between a 3845 and an 1841. The 3845
has a couple vpns already up and working, one of which is a VTI to a 2800.
The log just spits out:
CRYPTO-3-IKMP_QUERY_KEY : Querying key pair failed.
Cisco says -
Explanation: A public key or private key query attempt
Hello,
Anyone have any experience configuring etherchannel bundles across
multiple, different linecards on a Cisco 6509 IOS based switch? For
example we have a client who would like to have 3 x 1GE copper ports on
a WS-X6748-GE-TX linecard and 1 x 1GE SX fibre port on a WS-X6724-SFP
combined
Munroe, James (DSS/MAS) wrote:
Hello,
Anyone have any experience configuring etherchannel bundles across
multiple, different linecards on a Cisco 6509 IOS based switch? For
example we have a client who would like to have 3 x 1GE copper ports on
a WS-X6748-GE-TX linecard and 1 x 1GE SX
The scalable approach - use OSPF to carry ONLY your infrastructure and
Loopback addresses.
DO NOT carry your customer's IPv4/IPv6 addresses in OSPF, do this in
iBGP instead.
Does anyone have links to some good examples of this configuration?
I am in the process of moving our small ISP to
Hi Chuck-
Is there any chance that you have a TAC case open on this? If you do,
please unicast the SR # to me.
You won't see any firewall ACEs in the ACL that the FW is pinholing if
you're running 12.3(4)T or newer, due to ACL Bypass:
Sweet! Thanks Phil. :-)
-Original Message-
From: Phil Mayers [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 12:54 PM
To: Munroe, James (DSS/MAS)
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Etherchannel bundles on CAT6509 switches spanning
multiple linecards
Munroe,
Depending on the router type you can replace the DRAM in it yourself.
Look on Cisco.com for the router type and hardware installation guides
and it will explain how.
If you are gettin ECC errors that's the best place to start. Replace
the DRAM.
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 05:22:48PM +0200, Ziv
On Feb 27, 2008, at 10:46 AM, Munroe, James (DSS/MAS) wrote:
Anyone have any experience configuring etherchannel bundles across
multiple, different linecards on a Cisco 6509 IOS based switch?
Hi James,
In general it works great. However, please take note of this
Field Notice so you avoid
There is also the 6509-V-E chassis (which kinda looks like the Nexus
only less shiny) that supposedly offers 80Gbps/slot (which is not
exactly what you are looking for I guess but still might be worth
investigating).
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps708/data_sh
To clarify, this chassis is 80G per slot *ready* (as are all the E
chassis versions) - but there is no 80G/slot fabric shipping today.
Tim
At 05:27 PM 2/27/2008 +, Ramcharan, Vijay A observed:
There is also the 6509-V-E chassis (which kinda looks like the Nexus
only less shiny) that
At 02:20 AM 2/28/2008 +0800, Mark Tinka observed:
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Tim Stevenson wrote:
To clarify, this chassis is 80G per slot *ready* (as are
all the E chassis versions) - but there is no 80G/slot
fabric shipping today.
Okay, this clarifies my earlier-posted doubts.
My
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Tim Stevenson wrote:
To clarify, this chassis is 80G per slot *ready* (as are
all the E chassis versions) - but there is no 80G/slot
fabric shipping today.
Okay, this clarifies my earlier-posted doubts.
My guess is folk would be more inclined to assume
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Brandon Price wrote:
Does anyone have links to some good examples of this
configuration?
We normally cover this in regional workshops.
Will send you a link to some slides that discuss this
routing policy, tomorrow.
I am in the process of moving our small
ISP
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Ramcharan, Vijay A wrote:
There is also the 6509-V-E chassis (which kinda looks
like the Nexus only less shiny) that supposedly offers
80Gbps/slot (which is not exactly what you are looking
for I guess but still might be worth investigating).
I'm curious how
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Tim Stevenson wrote:
We have (or will shortly - launched, but not shipping) -
the Nexus 7000 has 230G per slot capacity. The initially
shipping 10G card can leverage 80G of that, but the
initially shipping fabric will scale to support much
higher capacity LCs in
At 02:46 AM 2/28/2008 +0800, Mark Tinka observed:
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Tim Stevenson wrote:
We have (or will shortly - launched, but not shipping) -
the Nexus 7000 has 230G per slot capacity. The initially
shipping 10G card can leverage 80G of that, but the
initially shipping
Does this mean Cisco are positioning the Nexus 7010 (and
other forthcoming models in the series) as a replacement of
the 6500 for a pure Layer 2 control plane application that
is looking beyond 40Gbps/slot and/or 80Gbps/slot, e.g.,
high speed core Ethernet switching within a single site?
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Dino Farinacci wrote:
Nope, the Cat6K has many more applications. Here are some
differences between the two platforms:
I'm familiar with the various features of the 6500 and Nexus
7010; what I was asking was what plans Cisco have for
customers that require
Hi Matthew,
I'm not sure about the logged message, but I've seen the
TP-self-signed certificates when I enable ip http secure-server and
IOS generates a certificate for this. If you don't use the certificates
you can could just remove them and see if that helps.
I couldn't figure out from your
Fix was:
crypto isakmp policy 20
authentication pre-share
group 2
Which enables the negotiation using pre share keys. If not the default
on the router is to use certificates.
matthew zeier wrote:
Trying to setup a VTI IPSEC VPN between a 3845 and an 1841. The 3845
has a couple vpns
Ziv,
There are two issues here;
1. your core concern - software forced crash
2. the secondary concern - parity errors
To troubleshoot the software forced crash, Cisco will need extra information
like the crashinfo files, steps to recreate, sh tech and logs. While waiting
for these data,
Dmitry,
By disabling parser config cache interface, you lose the enhancement it
introduces into NVGEN. If your config is large, you may want to add more
memory and re-enable this command to enhance NVGEN.
my 2 c
/eninja
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 1:20 AM, Dmitry Kiselev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kurt,
The enclosed captures are badly formatted irrespective, the cause of this
crash seems to be a memory corruption/leak or one of the thousands (no
kiddin) of bugs reported daily in the cisco ios T (technology) train.
You will not be serving your business and customers well if you stay on the
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, e ninja wrote:
You will not be serving your business and customers well if you stay on the
T-train because it simply contains way too many bugs. The rule of thumb is -
only use the T-train if and only if a_really_really_must_have feature was
recently introduced in it.
Cassidy,
Take a look at CSCei46978 - http://mysolvr.com/?show=1.15418 . The fixes for
i46978 should be in 12.4 mainline hence you may give it a shot.
Out of curiosity, if all your 7200s with NPE-G1s run the same IOS release
and the only difference is the NPE rev, what happens when you swap this
Hello.
As promised, here are the links that discuss BCP's for ISP
large scale routing, showing the use of OSPF and iBGP for a
scalable and comprehensive internal routing policy:
ftp://ftp-eng.cisco.com/pfs/isp-workshops/BGP_Presentations/bgp-3.pdf
This happens when the encryption is different.check the crypto
parameters.
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 27, 2008, at 2:39 PM, Peter Rathlev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Matthew,
I'm not sure about the logged message, but I've seen the
TP-self-signed certificates when I enable ip http
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008, Mark Tinka wrote:
Hello.
As promised, here are the links that discuss BCP's for ISP
large scale routing, showing the use of OSPF and iBGP for a
scalable and comprehensive internal routing policy:
ftp://ftp-eng.cisco.com/pfs/isp-workshops/BGP_Presentations/bgp-3.pdf
I have BFD configured between two routers, both running 12.4(15)T3. On
router A, BFD cycles between INIT and DOWN. On router B, the state
remains AdminDown. Here are the configs for both interfaces:
-- snip --
Router A:
interface FastEthernet0/0.1000
encapsulation dot1Q 1000
ip vrf
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
Unless you need a brand-new feature, or need to support
brand-new hardware, T-train code should not be running on
a production router.
Agree.
To hijack the thread some :-), we have a couple of boxes
running 12.4 mainline due to some
Don't think that 12.4.15T3 has VRF support for BFD.
Maybe try 12.2.33SRC (depends on what kind of routers you have)
I had a configuration like that and didn't work for me. Mine isn't a PE-CE
kind so didn't bother with SRC code.
-lmn
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Stephen Fulton [EMAIL
Mark,
I guess we are talking about 7200 routers, so I would suggest to wait a
bit with SRC, and in the mean while deploy 12.2(31)SB. This train will
remain alive for some time.
Arie
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Tinka
Sent:
51 matches
Mail list logo
