[c-nsp] ip cef linecard ipc service-timer on XR

Hi, Coammnd "ip cef linecard ipc service-timer" works fine on 12k (with srvice Internal). I tried this command over XR and found there is no service internal. Can I use this command on XR to optimize the traffic? Regards, Vikas Sharma ___ cisco-nsp mail

[c-nsp] FWSM - BGP stub vs RHI

Hi, In FWSM inplementation, which one is preffered BGP stub or RHI. My low confidecnce in RHI bcos it is the new feature and not deployed extensively. Regards, Vikas Sharma ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/ma

Re: [c-nsp] packet filtered message

ann kok wrote: > I am sure the address I ping is switch address. > But I don't know why it returns packet filtered > and no firewall before this switch Hi, Sounds like there's an access-list configured on the switch itself which is filtering you, being the ICMP unreachable came directly from the

Re: [c-nsp] ONS 15454 Backups

Via TL1: COPY-RFILE:TID:RFILE-PKG:703::TYPE=SWDL,SRC="FTP://USERID: passw...@hostip:21/DIR1/DIR2/DIR3/PACKAGE.PKG"; See the TL1 manual... http://www.ciscosystems.com/en/US/docs/optical/15000r7_0_1/tl1/454sdh/command/guide/e701copy.pdf I've used Net::Telnet to automate this, works well, much bet

[c-nsp] ONS 15454 Backups

Does anyone know if there is another way to backup the database on a Cisco ONS 15454 other than the using the CTC to manually back it up? -brian ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp arc

Re: [c-nsp] 3550 routing performance

Thanks for those who helped with this. I am ashamed to admit that despite my best intent at testing this thoroughly it was indeed a duplex mismatch (Doh!). That fixed the problem in my test environment, now I need to find out where it is in the prodcution setup and correct it. Thanks again, To

Re: [c-nsp] ip cef / ospf redundancy testing

Maybe simplifying the question will help. When I do a "sh ip cef exact-route " on the 3750, it shows me that traffic should flow over link A. However, in actuality, it flows over link B. When I do a "sh ip cef exact-route " it shows me that traffic should flow over link B. However, it actual

[c-nsp] ip cef / ospf redundancy testing

Maybe someone could point me in the right direction ... I'm doing some redundancy testing in the lab ... I basically have two 3750's linked together redundantly via OSPF. IP CEF is enabled. Both switches are running 12.2(25)SEE2. Switch B is receiving redundant default routes from switch A.

Re: [c-nsp] IGP advertisment

Chintan, Traceroute will keep working (as long as the destination is a loopback). You can still telnet/ping physical interfaces from directly attached routers, so if you troubleshoot a L2 issue - you do not lose much capabilities. Arie -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.neth

Re: [c-nsp] IGP advertisment

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 09:40:18PM +0530, Chintan Shah wrote: ... > I think i can do that without any issue but i worry that our operation team > may not be agree since they may loose troubleshooting flexibity like > traceroute , telnet to interface etc ... ... Why not put the /30 transfer networ

Re: [c-nsp] packet filtered message

Hi all Thank you for your help This address is fake address I am sure the address I ping is switch address. But I don't know why it returns packet filtered and no firewall before this switch Thank you --- On Tue, 12/30/08, Matlock, Kenneth L wrote: > From: Matlock, Kenneth L > Subject:

[c-nsp] IGP advertisment

Hi , As of now we have all /30 and /32 network being advertised in our IP/MPLS network running IS-IS in L1 and L2. so all PE have total number of IGP routes in network in their routing table. We plan to implement to advertise only loopback of P and PE in IGP to reduce memory and also for better co

Re: [c-nsp] GLC vs SFP

Gregori Parker wrote: Working with 7206VXR w/ NPE-G2 and I've been using GLC-SX-MM transceivers for interconnects with no problems. Had the need to support LX handoffs arise and noticed that Cisco advises SFP-* transceivers rather than GLC-* and I'm wondering why...only differences between the t

Re: [c-nsp] packet filtered message

Why not use 192.168.x.x for your IP addresses then to ensure that when trying to reach the switch you're not going to the Internet to try and reach it? Is there a valid reason you're using this IP space for testing purposes? -Original Message- From: ann kok [mailto:oiyan...@yahoo.ca] Sen

Re: [c-nsp] 3550 routing performance

On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 08:01, Tony wrote: > > I should have included that in my original post, I had already set SDM to > routing extended-match. If you don't you get a warning when you add a VRF to > prompt you to do it. > > Unfortunately not something that obvious. I'm a bit slow in reading

Re: [c-nsp] packet filtered message

Have you also checked to make sure you (or someone else) didn't fat-finger the address? You sure you didn't mean 192.168.x.x instead of 192.186.x.x? Ken Matlock Network Analyst Exempla Healthcare (303) 467-4671 matlo...@exempla.org -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.ne

Re: [c-nsp] packet filtered message

It's firewalled possibly? Just looked up that IP in our routing tables and it doesn't exist ... is this switch on the Internet itself?? -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of ann kok Sent: December 30, 2008 7:23

[c-nsp] packet filtered message

Hi I ping this catalyst 3500 switch the switch is not responsed but why it returns this message I also can't telnet this swtich Do you know why? PING 192.186.186.118 (192.186.186.118) 56(84) bytes of data. >From 192.186.186.118 icmp_seq=1 Packet filtered >From 192.186.186.118 icmp_seq=2 Packet

[c-nsp] FWSM - BGP STUB

Hi, I have FWSM contexts connected to vrf (part of MSFC) and then this vrf is connected to FWSM ext context and then to msfc. fwsm contest (1,2,3...n) ---> VRF --> Ext FWSM context ---> MSFC (Global routing table) >From fwsm cxt1,2,n to vrf are point to point connection. ctx1 --- vrf1 (vlan