Re: [c-nsp] hung vty on SXH3a?

Hi, On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 09:39:08PM -0500, Frank Bulk - iName.com wrote: Have you tried the SNMP approach? What is the SNMP approach? gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich,

[c-nsp] Non-Cisco SFPs (i.e. Finisar) in TwinGig modules on a 4900M?

Hi, Does anybody know if the 'service unsupported-transceiver' command is supported on the 4900Ms? We're intending to use Finisar 1000BaseLX SFPs. Thanks, Mark. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [c-nsp] ASR7401 and PA-FE-TX (ISL)

I have an update on this one... I powered off the router (in order to put a Wattmeter in between), and while I was at it, I thought hell, pull and push the card back in again which I did. Well, I don't know why, but this worked, the card sees a speed now and seems to work. Thank you all for

Re: [c-nsp] hung vty on SXH3a?

Gert Doering wrote: Hi, On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 09:39:08PM -0500, Frank Bulk - iName.com wrote: Have you tried the SNMP approach? What is the SNMP approach? You can use SNMP to close the TCP connection. Our local docs reckon: snmpwalk -c READCOMM -v 2c ROUTER .1.3.6.1.2.1.6.13.1.1 ...to

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus V1000 - Feedback?

All, I had some feedback from people that have tried it in the lab, but not in production yet. I notice that in all the Cisco marketing material it talks repeatedly about how the guest's security profile will migrate with the VM. However, as far as I can tell NX-OS only offers non-stateful

[c-nsp] Policy Based Routing on Cisco 6500

Hi, I am wondering if there any performance issue with using PBR on a Cisco 6500 with Sup720? Any pointers and suggestions are most appreciated. Thanks in advance, Shine ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [c-nsp] Non-Cisco SFPs (i.e. Finisar) in TwinGig modules on a 4900M?

* Mark Zipp mark.r.z...@gmail.com [2009-06-09 09:33]: Hi, Does anybody know if the 'service unsupported-transceiver' command is supported on the 4900Ms? We're intending to use Finisar 1000BaseLX SFPs. I can confirm this: NAME: Converter 3/2, DESCR: Converter Module PID: CVR-X2-SFP,

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus V1000 - Feedback?

On Jun 9, 2009, at 6:12 PM, Sam Stickland wrote: only offers non-stateful ACLs and no inspection so I'm not sure it's really that useful? Stateful inspection in front of front-end servers is generally not only useless, but counterproductive, as it greatly increases susceptibility to

Re: [c-nsp] Policy Based Routing on Cisco 6500

On Jun 9, 2009, at 6:00 PM, Shine Joseph wrote: I am wondering if there any performance issue with using PBR on a Cisco 6500 with Sup720? I think (correction welcome) that it only works in hardware based upon matching an extended ACL - any attempt to do things like match on packet size,

Re: [c-nsp] Policy Based Routing on Cisco 6500

Shine, PBR is done in hardware on the 6500. If you have DFC's, it would be done on the DFC. If not, the central PFC will do it. You should monitor your TCAM resources, as it may fill it up, and then traffic would be punted to the CPU - which you want to avoid at all costs. Use the show tcam

Re: [c-nsp] sh run crashes router

Need: sh ver sh stack and bonus points for a crashinfo file from flash: Did you try posting the sh stack in the output interpreter on Cisco.com? Rodney sh On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 02:29:15PM -0400, Richey wrote: I am setting up Tacacs+ on all of our far end routers so I can run rancid. I

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus V1000 - Feedback?

Hi, On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:12:32PM +0100, Sam Stickland wrote: I notice that in all the Cisco marketing material it talks repeatedly about how the guest's security profile will migrate with the VM. However, as far as I can tell NX-OS only offers non-stateful ACLs and no inspection so

[c-nsp] VPLS FRR (RSVP Fast Reroute)

Hello, Is it possible to deploy MPLS VPLS by using RSVP instead of LDP? I need FRR feature ;) Thanks Best Regards, Manu ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at

Re: [c-nsp] Policy Based Routing on Cisco 6500

Correct. See: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst6500/ios/12.2SX/configuration/guide/layer3.html#wpmkr1033564 •The Policy Feature Card (PFC) and any Distributed Feature Cards (DFCs) provide hardware support for policy-based routing (PBR) for route-map sequences that use the

Re: [c-nsp] VPLS FRR (RSVP Fast Reroute)

Is it possible to deploy MPLS VPLS by using RSVP instead of LDP? I need FRR feature ;) tongue in cheek Yes, it's called Juniper. /tongue in cheek Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sth...@nethelp.no ___ cisco-nsp mailing list

Re: [c-nsp] MPLS/IP-VPN capable cards on Cat 6500

SIP400/SIP600 is 7600 only too no? On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Arie Vayner (avayner) avay...@cisco.comwrote: Yes, this is true, ES20 is 7600 only (I missed the 6500 angle here ;-) ) We can do VPLS with SIP400 (lower BW) or SIP600 (higher BW). BTW, There is also support for MPLSoGRE

Re: [c-nsp] VPLS FRR (RSVP Fast Reroute)

i know junos very well thanks ;) On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:51 PM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote: Is it possible to deploy MPLS VPLS by using RSVP instead of LDP? I need FRR feature ;) tongue in cheek Yes, it's called Juniper. /tongue in cheek Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting,

Re: [c-nsp] hung vty on SXH3a?

Hi, On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 09:33:38AM +0100, Phil Mayers wrote: Gert Doering wrote: On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 09:39:08PM -0500, Frank Bulk - iName.com wrote: Have you tried the SNMP approach? What is the SNMP approach? You can use SNMP to close the TCP connection. Our local docs reckon:

Re: [c-nsp] MPLS/IP-VPN capable cards on Cat 6500

Not that I am aware of... http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps708/products_relevant_ interfaces_and_modules.html Arie From: Manu Chao [mailto:linux.ya...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 18:54 To: Arie Vayner (avayner) Cc: Marlon Duksa; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net

[c-nsp] HSRP and Standby router

Hi All I was studying some HSRP senario which is little bit different than what used to work on , we have 2 routers connected with access ports to internal box which has 2 direct physical layer-2 links to both routers and HSRP is running between VLAN SVIs on both routers across L2 ether-channel

Re: [c-nsp] Policy Based Routing on Cisco 6500

PBR by its nature is operationally brittle and ugly; if there's another way to accomplish one's goal, it's generally best to pursue an alternate method, if at all possible. Absolutely forcefully agree :) While this is a bit off-topic here's an example of what you can do with a

Re: [c-nsp] ACL creation and editing tool suggestions?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 David Freedman wrote: A newcomer to the 12.4(T) train is ACL Object Groups Some time ago I wrote a couple of Perl modules to help generate these for FWSM type devices. They might still be useful:

Re: [c-nsp] hung vty on SXH3a?

Odd, I've been seeing similiar problems lately in ASA 8.x code with IPv6 SSH connections...when IPv6 isn't enabled. Maybe the same team writes the management code? :) tv - Original Message - From: Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de To: Phil Mayers p.may...@imperial.ac.uk Cc: Gert

Re: [c-nsp] Opensource tool to measure Jitter for VoIP

On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 07:46:06AM -0500, Bryan Campbell wrote: You cannot measure VOIP (sip) jitter using ICMP tools. You will only s/sip/RTP/ [snip using Wireshark VoIP analysis] If you can't find jitter in this manner, it cannot be found. If it cannot be found, it doesn't exist. This

Re: [c-nsp] MPLS/IP-VPN capable cards on Cat 6500

Thanks Arie On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Arie Vayner (avayner) avay...@cisco.comwrote: Not that I am aware of… http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps708/products_relevant_interfaces_and_modules.html Arie *From:* Manu Chao [mailto:linux.ya...@gmail.com] *Sent:*

[c-nsp] ASA IPv6 SSH Re: hung vty on SXH3a?

On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Tony Varriale wrote: Odd, I've been seeing similiar problems lately in ASA 8.x code with IPv6 SSH connections...when IPv6 isn't enabled. Maybe the same team writes the management code? :) nope, they are different. :) If you have more details / case# for the ASA IPv6

[c-nsp] RTL-8139 NIC in WS-X6348-RJ-45 - no link

___ 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] BGP - OSPF (Or another way?)

Hi, On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 9:05 AM, m...@adv.gcomm.com.au wrote: I know redistributing bgp-ospf is considered a bad idea, but other than adding a static route, is there another option? You could use a 'reliable static' (using IP SLA and the 'track' keyword on the 'ip route' command) and

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus V1000 - Feedback?

The ACLs on the vswitch/nexus are only part of the security equation. It's using them in combination with vShield Zones at the ESX level (new feature of v4) that yields the best results. ~Max On Jun 9, 2009, at 7:39 AM, Gert Doering wrote: Hi, On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:12:32PM

[c-nsp] BGP - OSPF (Or another way?)

Hi, We are receiving a /24 from one of our upstreams, that we need to redistribute into our IGP (OSPF), so that all of our cores are aware that they can reach this /24 primarily through this upstream(Then, if this upstream is down, traffic destined to this /24 would go via our other

Re: [c-nsp] BGP - OSPF (Or another way?)

You could run iBGP from your borders into your core. On 10/06/09 9:05 AM, m...@adv.gcomm.com.au m...@adv.gcomm.com.au wrote: Hi, We are receiving a /24 from one of our upstreams, that we need to redistribute into our IGP (OSPF), so that all of our cores are aware that they can reach this /24

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus V1000 - Feedback?

On Jun 10, 2009, at 6:41 AM, Maxwell Reid wrote: It's using them in combination with vShield Zones at the ESX level (new feature of v4) that yields the best results. It's also important to note that all of this runs in software, and is thus subject to the performance limitations

Re: [c-nsp] Non-Cisco SFPs (i.e. Finisar) in TwinGig modules on a 4900M?

Hi Sebastian, 2009/6/9 Sebastian Wiesinger cisco-...@ml.karotte.org: * Mark Zipp mark.r.z...@gmail.com [2009-06-09 09:33]: Hi, Does anybody know if the 'service unsupported-transceiver' command is supported on the 4900Ms? We're intending to use Finisar 1000BaseLX SFPs. I can confirm this:

Re: [c-nsp] BGP - OSPF (Or another way?)

On 6/9/09 4:05 PM, m...@adv.gcomm.com.au m...@adv.gcomm.com.au wrote: Hi, We are receiving a /24 from one of our upstreams, that we need to redistribute into our IGP (OSPF), so that all of our cores are aware that they can reach this /24 primarily through this upstream(Then, if this

[c-nsp] PA-GE GBIC-T Support?

Does anyone know if the GBIC-T is officially supported in the PA-GE (for 7200's). We're actually running these in a dozen routers but until the other day have never noticed it saying: GigabitEthernet2/0 is up, line protocol is up Hardware is WISEMAN, address is 0005.5f23.b41c (bia

Re: [c-nsp] PA-GE GBIC-T Support?

The topic has been discussed before. Sounds like it works, but isn't officially supported. http://markmail.org/message/ozlmnboj6ytph4tq Skeeve Stevens wrote: Does anyone know if the GBIC-T is officially supported in the PA-GE (for 7200's). We're actually running these in a dozen routers