Re: [c-nsp] Cisco/HP 3020 refuses telnet

On our blade switches there is an option on the web interface that allows management from all -external- ports. By default this is disabled. -- Tassos matthew zeier wrote on 21-Jul-08 04:28: Peter Rathlev wrote: On Sun, 2008-07-20 at 16:15 -0700, matthew zeier wrote: I have a Cisco/HP

Re: [c-nsp] 7600, SRB3, high CPU on BGP Event

Chris, Some interfaces (like Eth) doesn't provide us with connectivity status at IP level. So U unnecessary need to have ur Ethernet to be flapping to lose IP-connectivity, correct? But I think U just have ur RIB rebuilt too fast due to flaps somewhere behind of ur neis. -- Respect, Andy

Re: [c-nsp] IPSec SA + EzVPN conflict

Not sure if there is any command to enforce a client-side split-vpn which breaks the server-side configuration. This would kind of invalidate the whole securitymodel. What you could do, is separate the two VPN's in two different VRF's. I haven't tried putting an EzVPN-config in a VRF before, but

[c-nsp] bgp traffic index

hi, i've configured BGP accounting policy exactly as written in the Cisco documentation and it's not working. this is an example from testing environment - i've 1 router in AS100 which is connected in F0/0 to 2 routers : AS200 + AS300. this is the configuration:

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco/HP 3020 refuses telnet

matthew zeier wrote: I have a Cisco/HP 3020 blade chassis switch that all of a sudden stopped accepting telnet (because rancid started to fail config checks). Short of rebooting I'm not sure how to fix. I can login on the console (using tacacs auth of all things, so IP works) and can ping

[c-nsp] Reconstructing a spanning-tree break

Hi, In the sh span vlan X detail command there's output similar to the following: Root port is 47 (GigabitEthernet1/47), cost of root path is 14 Topology change flag not set, detected flag not set Number of topology changes 11 last change occurred 2d00h ago from

Re: [c-nsp] BGP - unsupported parameter - peer reset

Hi, To my astonishment, everything started working fine after enabling mpls on juniper ERX globally. Can any one tell me the reason? My understanding which proved to be wrong in case of ERX is - The issue we have is bgp session not establishing (not, bgp is not advertising the vpnv4 routes).

Re: [c-nsp] Reconstructing a spanning-tree break

Hi, logging event link-status (or spanning-tree logging was not configured on any switch so don't know if any of the ports went up or down. no syslog either. what about the uptime of the switches...did one or more fail due to loss of power? are you running PVST? alan

[c-nsp] Fwd: bgp traffic index

-- Forwarded message -- From: almog ohayon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 3:24 PM Subject: Re: [c-nsp] bgp traffic index To: Raymond Macharia [EMAIL PROTECTED] cef was enabled globally. even after i've enabled ip route-cache flow it's not working. important note:

[c-nsp] FWSM and AAA

Hi, I have a setup where user dialin in to access server (BRAS) and get authenticated via AAA. Now I want to implement fwsm so that all traffic first go to fwsm then to anywhere in the network. But since user is getting all attributes e.g. ip address, vrf from aaa, I am not able to understand the

Re: [c-nsp] Reconstructing a spanning-tree break

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, logging event link-status (or spanning-tree logging was not configured on any switch so don't know if any of the ports went up or down. no syslog either. what about the uptime of the switches...did one or more fail due to loss of power? are you running

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco/HP 3020 refuses telnet

Is it possible it's out of memory? That can cause telnet to fail, but console access would still work. Chuck -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tassos Chatzithomaoglou Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 2:39 AM To: matthew zeier Cc:

[c-nsp] Maximizing Router capabilities

Hi list, I am trying to maximize my router's capabilty by maximizing its DRAM and Flash. Now I am trying to maximize IOS capabilities. Which is better to load, advance IP IOS or Enterprise IOS? THanks! Chris ___ cisco-nsp mailing list

Re: [c-nsp] Maximizing Router capabilities

You load the one you are licensed for... Michael Balasko -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dracul Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 8:01 AM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: [c-nsp] Maximizing Router capabilities Hi list, I am trying to

Re: [c-nsp] Maximizing Router capabilities

Dracul wrote: Thanks all, Assuming budget is not a hindrance. So should I go for the advance enterprise? Advance enterprise is different from advanced-ip series? Yes, they're different. It's not about budget, it's about what's right for your network. Feature-loaded sometimes translates to

Re: [c-nsp] Maximizing Router capabilities

Assuming budget is not a hindrance. So should I go for the advance enterprise? Advance enterprise is different from advanced-ip series? http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/iosswrel/ps8802/ps5460/prod_bulletin0900aecd80281b17.html ___ cisco-nsp

Re: [c-nsp] Maximizing Router capabilities

You should really shop by feature set. Advanced Enterprise IOS licenses are expensive. If you don't need all of the features present, you should only license the features you need. Expanding DRAM and Flash beyond what is required for the image you need is also sometimes expensive,

[c-nsp] Transparent Proxy

I don't know what I am doing wrong trying to set this up, I want to filter all port 80 traffic through a proxy. I have a 3662 configured the following way: Int f0/0 Main Internet Feed Int f/01 Network Users (That I want to force through a Proxy) ip policy route-map our-proxy access-list 111

Re: [c-nsp] Transparent Proxy

Hi, Take a look at WCCP. It should be supported on most of the proxy servers out there: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/ipapp/configuration/guide/ipapp_wccp _ps6350_TSD_Products_Configuration_Guide_Chapter.html Arie -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL

[c-nsp] Nexus Question

Does anyone know where I can find or what the power draw are for the Nexus - 48x1GE and 32x10GE LCs? Also, anyone heard when the NX7018 will be out? thx, Juno ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus Question

Juno, This should be what you asked for: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/datacenter/hw/nexus7000/install ation/guide/n7k_sys_specs.html Arie -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Juno Guy Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 19:45 PM To:

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus Question

At 09:44 AM 7/21/2008, Juno Guy observed: Does anyone know where I can find or what the power draw are for the Nexus - 48x1GE and 32x10GE LCs? The cisco power calculator: http://tools.cisco.com/cpc/ Also, anyone heard when the NX7018 will be out? Target is end of this calendar year,

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus Question

I don't know about the 32-port 10GE cards, but here's a 'show env power' from the N7K I'm working with to replace our 6506 and 6509: Power Supply: Voltage: 50 Volts - PS ModelPower Power Status

Re: [c-nsp] Maximizing Router capabilities

Hi, On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 11:01:18PM +0800, Dracul wrote: I am trying to maximize my router's capabilty by maximizing its DRAM and Flash. Now I am trying to maximize IOS capabilities. Which is better to load, advance IP IOS or Enterprise IOS? whatever you have paid for - this is an obvious

[c-nsp] 7961G won't boot

Hello, I have a 7961G that won't boot up. It powers on via poe, shows the cisco splash screen with the checkmark in the bottom left corner, then shows the upgrading screen for a few seconds, then says error on the upgrading screen, then goes back to the cisco splash screen and there is a circle

[c-nsp] ME6524 alternative

Hi. After an initial deployment with many ME6500's (ME6524-24GT-8S to be exact), we are finding too difficult to deal with Cisco for the expansion. What clear alternatives are available from other vendors or either from Cisco as a nice MPLS router with Ethernet only interfaces, even with less

Re: [c-nsp] 7961G won't boot

Dan, I've done this with 7960's, not a 7961. Have a look at the process for conversion of the phones, here it is for the 7960 couldn't find the same for a 7961: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/phones/ps379/products_tech_note09186a 0080094584.shtml http://tinyurl.com/23tw2c Hope it helps,

[c-nsp] QoS for VoIP to specific proxy

Hello folks, Please pardon me asking what I'm sure has been answered before. I've looked through the archives and the Cisco site, but I'm still confused about what I need to do. I have a client who's Cisco 1841 CPE router needs to simply prioritize SIP traffic to and from a specific VoIP proxy.

Re: [c-nsp] QoS for VoIP to specific proxy

Nick, You can use a class-map to match that traffic using an access-list. If you really want to be specific, you can do a match-all, and match it to 'protocol' as well. Then define a policy-map that prioritizes that class to a certain speed. Then attach the output policy to the

Re: [c-nsp] ME6524 alternative

Rubens Kuhl Jr. wrote: Hi. After an initial deployment with many ME6500's (ME6524-24GT-8S to be exact), we are finding too difficult to deal with Cisco for the expansion. What clear alternatives are available from other vendors or either from Cisco as a nice MPLS router with Ethernet only

Re: [c-nsp] ME6524 alternative

After an initial deployment with many ME6500's (ME6524-24GT-8S to be exact), we are finding too difficult to deal with Cisco for the expansion. What clear alternatives are available from other vendors or either from Cisco as a nice MPLS router with Ethernet only interfaces, even with less

Re: [c-nsp] QoS for VoIP to specific proxy

Hi Nick, You want something like this: class-map match-all VoIP-Control match protocol sip match access-group 101 class-map match-all VoIP-Data match dscp ef/match precedence 5/match protocol rtp ** match access-group 101 access-list 101 permit ip any host 202.x.VOIP.PROXY policy-map QOS-OUT

Re: [c-nsp] QoS for VoIP to specific proxy

Hi Nick, You want something like this: class-map match-all VoIP-Control match protocol sip match access-group 101 class-map match-all VoIP-Data match dscp ef/match precedence 5/match protocol rtp ** match access-group 101 access-list 101 permit ip any host 202.x.VOIP.PROXY policy-map QOS-OUT

Re: [c-nsp] QoS for VoIP to specific proxy

Thanks very much Charles. I'll use this as a template. -Nick From: Church, Charles [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:15:06 -0500 To: Nick Voth [EMAIL PROTECTED], cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Conversation: [c-nsp] QoS for VoIP to specific proxy Subject: RE: [c-nsp] QoS for VoIP to

Re: [c-nsp] QoS for VoIP to specific proxy

Thanks very much Ben. This makes sense. Thanks for your help! -Nick Voth From: Ben Steele [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 09:09:38 +0930 To: Nick Voth [EMAIL PROTECTED], cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] QoS for VoIP to specific proxy Hi Nick, You want something

[c-nsp] Disabling per-interface mls qos in 12.2SX, Possible?

Currently running a combination of SXF and SXH2a on 65xx, Sup720-3BXL Trying to disable PFC qos for a number of interfaces according to the documentation here: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/qos/command/reference/qos_m2.html#wp1011524 which states that this should be possible (introduced

Re: [c-nsp] BGP Hold Time Expired, but why?

same issue, no differences...got me On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 2:53 AM, Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know, but I would try it.. Looks weird.. oli -- *From:* Christian Koch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *Sent:* Saturday, July

Re: [c-nsp] Transparent Proxy

Yap, use WCCP. Your config below is not tranparent. Once your proxy down, all 80 failed. rgs a. rahman isnaini rangkayo sutan Arie Vayner (avayner) wrote: Hi, Take a look at WCCP. It should be supported on most of the proxy servers out there: