Re: [c-nsp] SXI(3) code status?

i am also interested in a bug id. i am running the same setup, still version SXI1, but has been running fine. yet another thing for me on my to-do-list: verify this on sxi1 regards, Geert 2009/11/20 Kevin Graham > > > > Problem also with SNMP ACL bypass with SXI3 on VSS setup. If you > configur

Re: [c-nsp] SXI(3) code status?

> Problem also with SNMP ACL bypass with SXI3 on VSS setup. If you configure > ACL > to protect access to SNMP RO or RW, the ACL is not filtering and access is > granted to anyone (if you know the community string of course). Ouch, will want to track this before moving off of SXH rebuilds an

Re: [c-nsp] ASR-1002 Feedback

On 11/19/2009 12:26 PM, Pshem Kowalczyk wrote: Hi, We've been using various ASR1k variants for the last few months. Generally the experience's been positive. Devices deliver what is expected in terms of performance without even breaking a sweat. We What sort of performance are you seeing?

[c-nsp] RFC-1483 on Cisco 12000

I have a new-to-me Cisco 12008 which I am working on swapping in as a replacement for a 7206VXR which was moving way too much traffic GRP,, Engine 1 Giga-E, Engine 0 Quad ATM OC3. Things have gone really well, and I'm quite happy so far... But ended up with one surprise. Didn't realize

Re: [c-nsp] Hi all

On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 23:39 +0100, Geert Nijs wrote: > the technical knowledge present in this list The information and help available here is the best and welcome to the list. I have been benefiting from C-NSP for years and the people are also very kind. Try and help when you can

[c-nsp] Hi all

Hello all, I am new to the list. I have been looking around in the archives, and i was surprised with the technical knowledge present in this list. I don't really have a service provider background, but more of an enterprise switching/datacenter switching background. Looking forward to some inter

Re: [c-nsp] ASR-1002 Feedback

Hi, We've been using various ASR1k variants for the last few months. Generally the experience's been positive. Devices deliver what is expected in terms of performance without even breaking a sweat. We used them mainly as border routers (in a PE configuration). One thing that you have to pay some

Re: [c-nsp] One-way traffic using L2TPv3

Hey all, Just for the record, it seems my issue was tied into using an xconnect statement on a port on a 16 port ESW module, even though there was a 'no switchport' on there. Upgrading to 12.4(25b) didn't fix it, in fact, it made it worse, no traffic in either direction. But when I mo

Re: [c-nsp] Router advice

Doug McIntyre wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 01:28:53PM -0800, Seth Mattinen wrote: >> Ivan wrote: >>> You may also want to check out the new ISR models (ISR G2 >>> http://www.cisco.com/go/isrg2). >>> >> I get the impression from reading about the new "universal" image that >> they phone home for

[c-nsp] ASR-1002 Feedback

Hi Folks, We're looking for a new Edge routing platform for our Core DC locations. This platform will terminate our internet links and bigger private links. ASR1002 on paper appears to be a good fit for our requirements. In the recent past, there have been reported issues with IOS stability and Fe

Re: [c-nsp] redistributing eigrp routes into bgp with tag intact

> Is there any way I can get a route tagged in eigrp redistributed into bgp > with the tag intact? don't think this is possible, so you would need to do it manually when you are using discrete values for EIGRP tag: route-map foo permit 10 match tag set community ! route-map foo permit 20 m

Re: [c-nsp] Router advice

On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 01:28:53PM -0800, Seth Mattinen wrote: > Ivan wrote: > > You may also want to check out the new ISR models (ISR G2 > > http://www.cisco.com/go/isrg2). > > > > I get the impression from reading about the new "universal" image that > they phone home for license keys before i

[c-nsp] RES: Recommended steps to avoid 100% CPU while executing"debugip nat"

Also when possible, filter the debug by using 'debug condition '. []´s ___ 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] Coax E1 over IP

Peter Rathlev wrote: On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 13:23 +0100, Aled Morris wrote: Have you looked at NM-CEM-4TE1 for the 2800? I've looked briefly at it, but it only seems to have RJ45 connectors[1], not BNC for coax. Otherwise it seems to fit the purpose. What can one do to take an E1 circuit from

[c-nsp] redistributing eigrp routes into bgp with tag intact

Is there any way I can get a route tagged in eigrp redistributed into bgp with the tag intact? ___ 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] Recommended steps to avoid 100% CPU while executing "debugip nat"

> > We have executed this morning "debug ip nat" in a 7206VXR with ver bad > results. > The router was overloaded for a while and at the end we needed to reboot > it. > well, any "busy" debug can kill a box, but the following recommendations can help to mitigate the risk (not get rid of it com

Re: [c-nsp] Catalyst 4507R Single Point of Failure

More details about the system: IOS cat4000-i9s-mz.122-18.EW7.bin Dual Sup-IV (4515). We are going to replace the Fan Tray in about 2 hours. Then we will verify in the lab with more detail how many fans are failing. I'll keep you updated. But no matter how many Fans are faulty, i was expectin

[c-nsp] Recommended steps to avoid 100% CPU while executing "debug ip nat"

Hi all, We have executed this morning "debug ip nat" in a 7206VXR with ver bad results. The router was overloaded for a while and at the end we needed to reboot it. I was doing some research but I would like to hear from you too. As a plan we have deployed CoPP configuration for management traffi

Re: [c-nsp] Coax E1 over IP

We use the CEM modules. They are quite cool. We use them to provide DR for analog T1's. I wrote a small tutorial. http://www.scotthughes.org/cem-failover 2 things to consider: -The cards don't work in the G2 (3945, etc) ISR routers. Haven't tried it, but that's what I've been told. -Ask you

Re: [c-nsp] ASA IPSec weirdness

Hello, Ryan West wrote: > Jan, > > -Original Message- > From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net > [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jan Gregor > Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 5:28 AM > > Hello all, > > recently I got issue with L2L IPSec tunnel on one of our

Re: [c-nsp] Coax E1 over IP

On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 12:46 +, Simon Lockhart wrote: > On Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 01:35:29PM +0100, Peter Rathlev wrote: > > What can one do to take an E1 circuit from coax? > > Put it through an RJ45 to Coax balun? The difference between RJ45 and > Coax is purely electrical, and baluns to convert

[c-nsp] Catalyst 4507R Single Point of Failure

Group, This is happening to a Catalyst 4507R: %C4K_IOSMODPORTMAN-4-FANTRAYBAD: Fan tray has failed %C4K_CHASSIS-2-INSUFFICIENTFANSDETECTED: Too few working fans in fan tray, the chassis will overheat. If not resolved, in 4 minutes all line cards will be placed into Reset-Mode %C4K_CHASSIS-2-INSU

Re: [c-nsp] Coax E1 over IP

Peter, Offtopic slightly but RAD make a whole range of IPmuxes to do exactly what you are after: http://www.rad.com/3-2563/Pseudowire_Remote_Gateways/ Pat Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 01:11:07PM +0100, Peter Rathlev wrote: > Hi everyone, > > We currently have a bunch of RAD FOM-E1/T1 modems. They wo

Re: [c-nsp] Coax E1 over IP

You need a Balun to convert the 75 ohm unbalanced (Coax) to a 120 ohm balanced RJ45. Those are widely available and not very expensive. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balun BR, Sibbi > From: Peter Rathlev > Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 13:35:29 +0100 > To: Aled Morris > Cc: cisco-nsp > Subject: Re

Re: [c-nsp] Coax E1 over IP

Is it as easy as that? Can we just insert an adapter cable to convert from coax to RJ45 and then use e.g. the NM-CEM-4TE1? Yes. Cisco also has such cables eg. I think CAB-ADPT-75-120 was the part number, but I guess it will be much cheaper if you get a eg. Krone _

Re: [c-nsp] Coax E1 over IP

On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 23:43 +1100, Patrick Cole wrote: > Offtopic slightly but RAD make a whole range of IPmuxes to do exactly > what you are after: > > http://www.rad.com/3-2563/Pseudowire_Remote_Gateways/ Our RADs have been rock solid for many many years, but all other things equal we would pre

Re: [c-nsp] Coax E1 over IP

On Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 01:35:29PM +0100, Peter Rathlev wrote: > What can one do to take an E1 circuit from coax? Put it through an RJ45 to Coax balun? The difference between RJ45 and Coax is purely electrical, and baluns to convert are easily available and at low cost. Simon -- Simon Lockhart |

Re: [c-nsp] Coax E1 over IP

On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 13:23 +0100, Aled Morris wrote: > Have you looked at NM-CEM-4TE1 for the 2800? I've looked briefly at it, but it only seems to have RJ45 connectors[1], not BNC for coax. Otherwise it seems to fit the purpose. What can one do to take an E1 circuit from coax? -- Peter [1]:

[c-nsp] Coax E1 over IP

Hi everyone, We currently have a bunch of RAD FOM-E1/T1 modems. They work in pairs converting E1 (entering via coax) to optical signaling carried via single mode fiber to another modem that converts back to coax. Since we have practically no way of monitoring the RAD modems, and since it seems wa

[c-nsp] Spanning tree limits on 4500

What are the limits for spanning tree on Cisco 4500? I'm interested both in MST and PVST+. Is it a set "STP instances" like normal switches, or virtual/logical ports like 6500? And what are the numbers? Any funky commands to check? I searched the archives but couldn't find anything on 4500s.

[c-nsp] metroethernet 3750 traffic policing

i have Cisco metroethernet 3750 i want to limit the traffic in outbound direction as i read the limit can be made in the inbound direction what else can i do to limit the traffic ?? thanks ___

Re: [c-nsp] SXI(3) code status?

You are hitting bug id CSCtd21722 which we have reported to Cisco last week. Problem also with SNMP ACL bypass with SXI3 on VSS setup. If you configure ACL to protect access to SNMP RO or RW, the ACL is not filtering and access is granted to anyone (if you know the community string of course)