On Jun 23, 2009, at 12:24 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
Short answer is "no". My experience is that measurements normally
varies by several milliseconds, and sometimes much more than that.
Correct, it's in the ms range.
--
Hey Ted, (off topic) why would you sell such a nice car? It's a classic! I'd
love to get one and pimp it!
-Original Message-
From: Ted Mittelstaedt [mailto:t...@mittelstaedt.us]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:07 AM
To: Sridhar Ayengar
Cc: Ziv Leyes; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009, Jeff Bacon wrote:
How accurate is the new(ish) IP SLA measurement system? For local metro
links with RT times in the 300-500usec range, can it monitor for
variations of 100-200usec in some reasonable fashion?
Short answer is "no". My experience is that measurements normal
Hi,
Can anyone with SP experience state why would one choose pipe model over short
pipe model or vice versa for deploying MPLS QoS?
I have been searching the cisco site and other places a for a while to get an
answer.
Any pointers suggests welcome.
Thanks in advance,
Shine
___
On 23/06/2009, at 7:22 AM, Lukasz Bromirski wrote:
On 2009-06-22 23:12, MKS wrote:
For example ASR 1k with RP1 or RP2 end properly sized ESP. Look
for the
cisco.com site for details.
Does someone as some performance reference regarding the netflow
implementation for the ASR1K ?
How dues it
On 2009-06-22 23:12, MKS wrote:
For example ASR 1k with RP1 or RP2 end properly sized ESP. Look for the
cisco.com site for details.
Does someone as some performance reference regarding the netflow
implementation for the ASR1K ?
How dues it scale and that sampling options are there?
The size o
How accurate is the new(ish) IP SLA measurement system? For local metro links
with RT times in the 300-500usec range, can it monitor for variations of
100-200usec in some reasonable fashion?
(Yes it can vary that much just dependent on queueing, load, etc. I am just
curious what people's expe
>> What alternatives are out there for a similar amount of money?
>For example ASR 1k with RP1 or RP2 end properly sized ESP. Look for the
>cisco.com site for details.
Does someone as some performance reference regarding the netflow
implementation for the ASR1K ?
How dues it scale and that sampli
Hi,
We're about to expand our use of OSPF PE-CE connections in some
redundant setups, and in that regard I'd be happy to know more precisely
if I can expect all (most) customer devices to repect the DN bit.
As I understand OSPF, all customer routers should just not care about
the DN bit in all LS
>> Does it hold though that etherchannel traffic gets replicated to all
>> modules with bundle members?
> No.
Got it, so the issue is only for bus traffic and whether all port asic's
grab it (6148 as discussed) or just the tx asic (as you clarified for
6548)?
> The filtering is effective on a p
At 09:37 AM 6/22/2009, Kevin Graham stated:
> You are correct. That only applies to the 6148. Originally it also
> applied to the 6548 as well, but that limitation was removed later by
> s/w optimizations in the LTL programming scheme. So you *can* get
> more than 1G thru an etherchannel with 6
> You are correct. That only applies to the 6148. Originally it also
> applied to the 6548 as well, but that limitation was removed later by
> s/w optimizations in the LTL programming scheme. So you *can* get
> more than 1G thru an etherchannel with 6548s, but of course, you
> still can only
> Hmm. I'm more familiar with the sup720/PFC3 hardware than the earlier stuff.
Sup2/MSFC2 is same switching paths as 720, only major difference is the common
lack of a switch fabric.
> What IOS version are you running? Can you "show mod"?
>
> Are the servers & backup kit on the same linecard?
> The only thing I can see as a difference is if I trunk the iSCSI vlan,
> then the traffic never hits the 6509's routing module. Maybe that helps
> performance?
No. Assuming the 6500 isn't a relic with an MSM or Sup1/Sup1A, there
should be no difference in L2 and L3 forwarding performance (
If you have DFC on the linecard, then *everything* is distributed for
traffic ingress on that linecard - L2, L3, ACLs, QoS, Netflow. If
not, then it's centrally processed by the PFC for traffic ingress on
that linecard. There is no "local L2 switching" (or any other local
forwarding decisions)
Kevin Graham wrote:
Hmm. I'm more familiar with the sup720/PFC3 hardware than the earlier stuff.
Sup2/MSFC2 is same switching paths as 720, only major difference is the common
lack of a switch fabric.
What IOS version are you running? Can you "show mod"?
Are the servers & backup kit on th
I actually don't know if the linecard has a DFC. It's an old 6509 and keeping
any hardware information straight on this proves to be confusing to me.
This is what I have.
L3 Switching Engine II WS-F6K-PFC2
1000BaseX Supervisor WS-X6K-SUP2-2GE
Multilayer Switch Feature WS-F6K-MSFC2
Switch Fa
Jason Luke wrote:
I actually don’t know if the linecard has a DFC. It’s an old 6509 and
keeping any hardware information straight on this proves to be confusing
to me.
This is what I have.
L3 Switching Engine II WS-F6K-PFC2
1000BaseX Supervisor WS-X6K-SUP2-2GE
Multilayer Switch Featu
Hey everyone,
Last week's converstaion on 6500 scalaibility numbers prompted me to
dig back into the performance issues I have on a pair of boxes. I
discovered two issues, both related to the presence of CSMs in the
chassis. An important note about my scenario - I have two basically
identical in
So the question is, is there a difference? I have hundreds of GB's
to backup so if there is a performance difference one way or the
other, I would want to know. The only thing I can see as a
difference is if I trunk the iSCSI vlan, then the traffic never hits
the 6509's routing module. Maybe th
i.e. I am seeing:
client sport=5000 dport=53 query id=2346 hostname A
client sport=5000 dport=53 query id=4646 hostname
server dport=5000 sport=53 reply id=2346 A=192.168.x.y
...and that's it. The 2nd reply is dropped. If the client makes the
queries "slowly" they work fine:
Just a foll
Phil Mayers wrote:
All,
We've recently deployed config on our ACE (blades in 6500s) to provide
resilient DNS.
However, the ACE seems to be doing some kind of DNS inspection, and is
(incorrectly I think) closing the SLB session the instant a DNS answer
comes back. This causes problems with c
Hi,
in Germany, it has become common that the major consumer ISPs do not
answer DNS requests for non-existing hostnames with NXDOMAIN, but
deliver a fake A record instead which points to a web server which
delivers a web page which says helpful things like "the page you
requested does not exists,
I'm not sure if it matters but if it does, I would like to know.
I have two buildings, connected via fiber (1 Gig speed only). In bldg one, I
have my core switch (6509) and that core switch has the default route for
everything in bldg 2. In other words, bldg 2 does not have a router, just a
swi
So, you hijacked a thread, didn't remove the old text and then asked a question
that could have been answered by going to www.cisco.com and searching for
AIM-VPN/SSL-3?
http://tools.cisco.com/search/JSP/search-results.get?strQueryText=AIM-VPN%2FSSL-3&x=0&y=0&Search+All+cisco.com=cisco.com&lang
The 10GE baseboard ports and the 4 port half cards do not support the TwinGig
converter. Only 8 port half cards can support the TwinGig converter.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps6021/ps9310/Data_Sheet_Cat_4900M.html
Check under Table 2.
This will show the Ports Usin
On 22/06/2009, at 9:15 PM, Sam Stickland wrote:
Hi,
Is anyone able to confirm whether the onboard X2 slots on the 4900M
support the twin-gig modules?
Some of the documentation suggests they are only supported on the 8-
Port (2:1) 10 Gigabit Ethernet (X2) Half Card, but I haven't seen
any
They do not, i have 24 of them up in production, you have to use the half
cards. I was unsure of this as well and had to work with my Cisco Rep to
verify this before buying them. Documentation below must be updated it
shows Table 1, that the Twin Gig is only supported on the 8 port and 10
gig Eth
Hi,
Is anyone able to confirm whether the onboard X2 slots on the 4900M
support the twin-gig modules?
Some of the documentation suggests they are only supported on the 8-Port
(2:1) 10 Gigabit Ethernet (X2) Half Card, but I haven't seen any that
definitively rules out there use on the onboard
Hello,
Can you provide me below IOS please.
c3825-ipbasek9-mz.124-24.T.bin
If someone have this IOS please send me by email
tseveendorj2...@yahoo.com or assign my CCO account named otseveendorj
without access privilege any resources of Cisco.
Then I really appreciate.
Thank you.
Tseveen.
AToM Remote Ethernet Port Shutdown Feature supported on CRS-1, XR 12K, 10K,
12K, 7200 NPE-G2
-> not supported on 6500
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 1:41 PM, John wrote:
> Hi All
> Im playing around with EoMPLS on 6500`s w/SUP720-3b and 6700 line cards...
> No ES hardware.
>
> Everything seems fine, per
31 matches
Mail list logo
