Re: [c-nsp] Global Route Leaking on same PE

Just additional Info Here's what "my" Cisco Technical sayed last time i looked at it... You can not point the next-hop to the local routers interface. Development does not plan on supporting this configuration. < Looks bad - I did it with a "golden Cable" - Physcal crossover loop..

Re: [c-nsp] ME-4924-10GE & mgt port

Victor, Try taking a look here: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst4500/12.2/52sg/conf iguration/guide/sw_int.html#wp1110617 Arie -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of victor Sent: Wednesday, J

Re: [c-nsp] clear ip pool

Sebastian Ganschow <> wrote on Friday, June 12, 2009 11:55: > Hi, > > we've got our ciscos configured that ip pool configuration is derived > from our radius servers. > > In order to change the ip pool, I change the pool in the radius > config. But our ciscos are still using the old ip pool. It

[c-nsp] ME-4924-10GE & mgt port

Hi Please, help. What is the purpose of mgt port on ME-4924-10GE. I somehow feel that it's for out-of-band management but there is no corresponding entry in the config. Though during the boot it prints "1 Virtual Ethernet Interface". Current IOS - ipbase-m 12.2(31) sga5. How can I use this

Re: [c-nsp] 3825 memory issue

PPP IP Route process eating a lot of memory and It is keep eating up hour by hour. border-r#sh processes memory sorted holding Processor Pool Total: 143619888 Used: 120966360 Free: 22653528 I/O Pool Total: 36699648 Used: 10651088 Free: 26048560 PID TTY Allocated FreedHo

Re: [c-nsp] Can you apply crypto map to SVI

I think on the 6500 with Sup720 you may need a IPSec VAM or SPA card for IPSec functionality to be active; I wonder if this is the same on the 7606; you should open a case with Cisco and ask the quesiton. Regards, Ge Moua | Email: moua0...@umn.edu Network Design Engineer University of Minnesot

Re: [c-nsp] Can you apply crypto map to SVI

Hi Ge, This is being implemented on a Cisco 7606 (SUP720) running 12.2(18)SXF16. Thanks. Andy -Original Message- From: Ge Moua [mailto:moua0...@umn.edu] Sent: Wednesday, 17 June 2009 2:15 PM To: Andy Saykao Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: Can you apply crypto map to SVI Ma

Re: [c-nsp] Can you apply crypto map to SVI

Maybe; I've seen a situation with the me-6524 with the crypto commands available but functionality disabled. What hardware platform are you running? Regards, Ge Moua | Email: moua0...@umn.edu Network Design Engineer University of Minnesota | Networking & Telecommunications Services Andy Sa

Re: [c-nsp] 3825 memory issue

Hello, *Dead* is nothing but processes as a group that are now dead. "Holding" is Amount of memory currently allocated to the process. "Allocated" is Bytes of memory allocated by the process. "Freed" is Bytes of memory freed by the process, regardless of who originally allocated it. Please t

Re: [c-nsp] Can you apply crypto map to SVI

Hi Ge, Yes I see an active crypto engine in "software". core1#sh cry engine configuration crypto engine name: unknown crypto engine type: software serial number: 00016956 crypto engine state: installed crypto engine in slot: N/A pl

[c-nsp] 3825 memory issue

Hello, I'm using 3825 router to provide internet for ADSL customers. Last week I configured policy-map to provide different bandwidth usage. Since this time my routers memory usage goes up. border-r#sh processes memory sorted allocated Processor Pool Total: 143619888 Used: 118621160 Free:

[c-nsp] Dynamic DNS updates to Local DNS Server

Hello, I cannot seem to find any information or configuration examples of using a Cisco IOS DHCP server to update A records on a local dns server. I would like to have the router that is running dhcp update the records for a few windows workstation to a bind dns server. Any help would be appreci

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 2821 as an ethernet fed MPLS PE

2821 works as an MPLS PE, the 10/100/1000 interfaces on 2821 support higher MTU. If you downsize to a 2811/01, you have to run 12.4(x)T to get a user-settable MTU on the 10/100 interface. Even then you get an error message, but the MTU command is accepted. I'm not sure exactly where support

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 2821 as an ethernet fed MPLS PE

Hi Chris, This link will tell you about the MPLS support (answer = yes, depending): http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/iosswrel/ps6537/ps6557/prod_white_paper0900aecd8051fbdc.html And look here for jumbo frame support on 2800 (answer = yes, up to 9000 bytes): http://www.cisco.

[c-nsp] Cisco 2821 as an ethernet fed MPLS PE

Can anyone comment on the 2821 as an ethernet fed MPLS PE? This would require a settable MTU on the GigE ports "ie: mtu 1576", and standard support for LDP, MP-BGP, standard L3 VPN support. Spent too much time trolling Cisco site and not finding answers. -- ---

Re: [c-nsp] XENPAK packet loss

Ok. On the 4-6 ps/nm/km basis we are close but not outside out budget. The lower number is what we budgeted for. We solved the primary traffic problem (which packet loss on two completely different links). It wasn't related to the hardware but rather the MPLS FIB being in exception. Supposedly yo

Re: [c-nsp] Network Perefromance

We are a Cisco shop, so we use "ip sla" feature of newer IOS releases with CiscoWorks LMS. Netflow is useful for trafic monitoring, but for latency and jitter, the cisco featureset is really nice. For example, between two of our voice gateway boxes (running sip trunking between them) in NY & SF:

Re: [c-nsp] Global Route Leaking on same PE

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Luan Nguyen wrote: > You could also use a GRE tunnel for the connection as well. > Jeff is right that this topic keeps coming up every so often.  I wonder why > Cisco won't just make this easier for people. > > -- > Luan N

Re: [c-nsp] LX vs LH Transceivers

For the sake of completeness on this thread I was able to use the LH transceiver just fine after entering the command "speed nonegotiate" on the interface. I will be interested to hear what the provider has to say about this now, even though prior to making my config change I double checked with

[c-nsp] Network Perefromance

I wanted to ping everyone on tools they were using to understand the performace of their network, specifically, measuring packet loss, latency, and jitter. mike ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinf

Re: [c-nsp] 6500/SUP32 - RP ROMMON upgrade?

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:21:18PM +0300, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote: > > >When we did a SP rommon upgrade to 45 sup720s a while back (to fix > >some serious booting bugs) we lost one sup720 when it became bricked > >due to a failed rommon upgrade. > > > > Since there is a resident (GOLD) romm

Re: [c-nsp] Global Route Leaking on same PE

You could also use a GRE tunnel for the connection as well. Jeff is right that this topic keeps coming up every so often. I wonder why Cisco won't just make this easier for people. -- Luan Nguyen Chesapeake NetCraftsmen, LLC. http://www.netcraftsmen.net

Re: [c-nsp] Global Route Leaking on same PE

Thanks for the replies all. > > > >I maybe wrong, but seems this was related to resolving the CEF adjacency > to a physical interface ? > >I understand that you could then use the ip route vrf command, adding the > interface in the ip route statement. > >> >> > Tried this and it said vpn routes

Re: [c-nsp] Global Route Leaking on same PE

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 07:23:45PM +0200, Ivan Pepelnjak wrote: > The last time I've seen discussion on this topic, you had to have an > external back-to-back connection between a VRF interface and a global > interface. Depending on the platform, you can do it with a GRE tunnel with both ends on

Re: [c-nsp] 7201 NPE-G2 vs. 7204 with NPE-G2 engine

Well the 7201 comes with 4x GE ports, and with the NPE-G2 your only getting 3x GE ports to start. To get the same you would have to add a PA-GE to your router, and probably the Jacket Card and PA-GE if you didn't want to suck up all the bandwidth points of the slots. Personally I went with a 72

Re: [c-nsp] Global Route Leaking on same PE

Ivan Pepelnjak wrote: The last time I've seen discussion on this topic, you had to have an external back-to-back connection between a VRF interface and a global interface. I maybe wrong, but seems this was related to resolving the CEF adjacency to a physical interface ? I understand that yo

Re: [c-nsp] Global Route Leaking on same PE

The last time I've seen discussion on this topic, you had to have an external back-to-back connection between a VRF interface and a global interface. > -Original Message- > From: Clue Store [mailto:cluest...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 4:18 PM > To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.ne

Re: [c-nsp] Global Route Leaking on same PE

Clue Store wrote: > Hi All, > > Looked through the archives but couldn't find anything about this specific > issue. I'm trying to leak a route from the global table on a PE to an > iterface that is on the same PE but I get the folowwing when I try to just > point it to a loopback. > > ip route

Re: [c-nsp] XENPAK packet loss

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:19:08 +0200 (CEST), Mikael Abrahamsson wrote > On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, FF wrote: > > > I thought Chromatic Dispersion is distance related. This is supposed > > Yes it is. > > > to be SMF-28 DSF, the optics are supposed to be 80km (XENPAK DWDM 1600 > > ps dispersion tolerance)

Re: [c-nsp] XENPAK packet loss

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:19 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, FF wrote: > >> I thought Chromatic Dispersion is distance related. This is supposed > > Yes it is. > >> to be SMF-28 DSF, the optics are supposed to be 80km (XENPAK DWDM 1600 >> ps dispersion tolerance). Do you need

Re: [c-nsp] XENPAK packet loss

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, FF wrote: I thought Chromatic Dispersion is distance related. This is supposed Yes it is. to be SMF-28 DSF, the optics are supposed to be 80km (XENPAK DWDM 1600 ps dispersion tolerance). Do you need a DCU even when operating within that range? One of the links is only ab

[c-nsp] Global Route Leaking on same PE

Hi All, Looked through the archives but couldn't find anything about this specific issue. I'm trying to leak a route from the global table on a PE to an iterface that is on the same PE but I get the folowwing when I try to just point it to a loopback. ip route vrf test 64.193.x.x 255.255.255.

Re: [c-nsp] Double Natting

Mohammad Khalil wrote: hey all i have a wimax CPE which have public IP address and from the LAN side it has the ip add 192.168.1.1 and its DHCP enabled now i have tp-link router that is connected to the CPE and got the ip address 192.168.1.100 i connected a laptop to the router and got the ip ad

Re: [c-nsp] XENPAK packet loss

I thought Chromatic Dispersion is distance related. This is supposed to be SMF-28 DSF, the optics are supposed to be 80km (XENPAK DWDM 1600 ps dispersion tolerance). Do you need a DCU even when operating within that range? One of the links is only about 40-50km. Is there a Cisco command to pull up

Re: [c-nsp] LX vs LH Transceivers

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 7:08 PM, Justin Krejci wrote: > Everywhere online that I could find seems to indicate LX and LH are 100% > compatible with each other and that Cisco even uses these two > interchangeably (to the dismay of some). LX and LH interoperability shouldn't be an issue, we mix and m

Re: [c-nsp] Double Natting

Thanks all for ur assist , i configured port forwarding before submitting my request but the CPE is dump i figured it later that u have to assign port range not a specific port on the CPE :) > From: eng_m...@hotmail.com > To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net > Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:38:58 +0300 > S

Re: [c-nsp] Double Natting

Mohammad, Yes, you can, but you will have to configure port mapping on both NAT devices. RDP should be using port 3389 Arie -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mohammad Khalil Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 15:3

Re: [c-nsp] LX vs LH Transceivers

On Monday 15 June 2009 07:08:03 pm Justin Krejci wrote: > There appears to be a fair amount of threads online about using LX and LH > together on a SMF link. I have a situation where there is a 7206VXR with an > NPE-G1 that has a LX GBIC installed that is talking via SMF to a 12000 > series router

[c-nsp] Double Natting

hey all i have a wimax CPE which have public IP address and from the LAN side it has the ip add 192.168.1.1 and its DHCP enabled now i have tp-link router that is connected to the CPE and got the ip address 192.168.1.100 i connected a laptop to the router and got the ip address 192.168.2.100 can

[c-nsp] RSP720-10GE & C7606

Hi All, I have a pair of RSP720-10GEs and a 7606 chassis. The RSP datasheet suggests they aren't compatible. Does anyone have any evidence either way? Thanks, adam. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman

Re: [c-nsp] mars reinstall

Yeah, we had some problems with MARS too so we've upgraded it to SATURN, much greater and robust, and hey, you've gotta love the rings and the 61 moons! Just kiddin' Have you look at this link? http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6241/prod_installation_guides_list.html There are a lot of guides

Re: [c-nsp] Can you apply crypto map to SVI

Yes, this should work contigent on hw plaform. If you do a "sh cry engine" do you see an active crypto engine in sw or hw? If not then the crypto commands will never be invoked even though legal. Regards, Ge Moua | Email: moua0...@umn.edu Network Design Engineer University of Minnesota | Net

[c-nsp] mars reinstall

Hi all! I have a problem. Our Mars doesn't want to work good. It not responding remotely. I need a good user guide what tells me how to reinstall the MARS. we have 4.x version on it and I think i'm going to install 6.x. how can I do it, pls help Thank you. br Gabor

[c-nsp] SVI bandwidth

Hello! Is there any way to configure some sort of "bandwidth inherit" command, but regarding SVI not sub-interfaces? Or some way to configure the default bandwidth for all SVIs without own explicit definition? Thanks! P.S. C7600-RSP720 under latest 12.2SRC -- Dmitry Kiselev ___