Hello,
somewhere in an old document (CatOS) it states the problem:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps700/products_tech_note09186a008013565f.shtml
Known Limitations of VACLs and PVLANs
Unicast Reverse Path Forwarding (uRPF) does not work well with PVLAN host
ports, so uRPF must
Some basics:
1) You can't compare cost between routing protocols. Each protocol has its
own cost metrics.
(ospf based on bandwidth, bgp based on AS path length and other variables)
2) Between routing protocols, the only thing that counts is administrative
distance
3) In your example below, BGP
I have had good experiences with SRD. SRC is pretty stable too but has
a collection of BGP related memory leaks you need to watch out for.
I have only had bad experiences with SRE, so much so that we had to
roll-back a SUP720 from SRE back onto SRC because of crashes (related
to
SRB and SRC are no longer maintained.
SRE is too new.
That more or less leaves SRD.
Any other and more precise recommendation than that would require a
detailed analysis of the features required and the open DDTS'es on the
specific trains.
-A
___
Hello everybody,
here's the setup:
Router model is 7301+PA-2FE-TX with IOS 12.3(14)T3. For those
who shout upgrade! already - same problem with 12.4s.
Router is connected to HKIX via FastEthernet1/1.
No problems whatsoever in IPv4, but here's what I have in IPv6:
1. IPv6 BGP saves routes
Hi all,
I'm in the process of migrating a 6513 from a Sup2 to a Sup32, and I've
found myself in a bit of a funny situation where I'm questioning the boot
config on a device for rollback planning. This is probably a very easy one,
but I'm just a bit uneasy about this particular chassis.
Basically
Group,
Well, today i was troubleshooting a routing problem and i enabled debug ip
routing as i do many times. But this time i got a very
unpleasant surprise:
++
XXX uptime is 1 minute
System returned to ROM by bus error at PC 0x29CA3C, address 0x0
System image file is
On 3/3/10 11:46 PM, vijay gore wrote:
Team,
i have installed one 3800 cisco router at my one of customer end, and
ihave to submit some security documents , in that document i have explain
cryptographic features, please help me for this, if anyone is having related
documents or how the
hello elmar,
actually this is normal because ALL the routes you are receving from your
ebgp neighbor will be having the FE80 as next hop of out going (or you can
say incoming) interface i.e. fa1/1 in your case. Why the router doesn't see
the FE80 address when it is of the outgoing interface of
Hello Elmar:
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Elmar K. Bins
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 5:57 AM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] IPv6, neighbor detection, BGP and my nerves...
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 09:16:18AM -0800, Michael K. Smith - Adhost wrote:
You might want to modify your interface configuration to match the one
below. You shouldn't need neighbor discovery and the like for a direct
peering connection. This is the configuration I use at the SIX.
IPv6
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 02:57:15PM +0100, Elmar K. Bins wrote:
2001:7FA:0:1::CA28:A19E 0 0012.f29c.2150 REACH Fa1/1
FE80::212:F2FF:FE9C:21500 - INCMP Fa1/1
That's pretty weird. Funny firewall rules on the other side? Funny
firewall
On 04/03/10 13:57, Elmar K. Bins wrote:
Hello everybody,
here's the setup:
Can you send the config for the BGP peering and the interface over which
it runs?
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
-Original Message-
From: Gert Doering [mailto:g...@greenie.muc.de]
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 9:38 AM
To: Michael K. Smith - Adhost
Cc: Elmar K. Bins; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] IPv6, neighbor detection, BGP and my nerves...
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at
Thank you for the replies--
It is not my choice to be running both routing protocols and
redistributing them into each other. My eventual goal is to get rid of
OSPF. I must admit that I am new more familiar with EIGRP and OSPF,
not so much with BGP. However, it comes with the MPLS territory.
I can't even think of what the magic google/cco-fu would be to look for
this.
7609-S with Sup720-3BXL running 12.2(18)SXF16 with a WS-X6516-GE-TX.
All ports on the 6516 are configured in the same VLAN (using interface
range...) as access ports:
---
switchport
switchport access vlan 3
I have it:
CSCei59309 Bug Details
Crash in iprouting_set_ndb_last_rdb()
Symptoms
A Cisco platform can crash after enabling debug ip routing.
This was observed on switch 3750E running IOS release 12.2(37)SE.
Conditions
The problem
Hi Rick,
Was wondering if you did any ospf debugs (adj, packet)? Did it show anything
interesting?
Any output on the 7500 with sh ip ospf nei? How about the ones you say see
it? What state is the relationship?
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Rick Ernst c...@shreddedmail.com wrote:
I can't
OSPF debug (packet, event) showed no incoming OSPF packets. The 2-3
neighbors that did come up on the 7500 were in FULL/DR, FULL/BDR, and
2WAY/DROTHER (from memory; I was more interested in getting the device up
rather than capturing details).
One thing I was thinking of was that the physical
Are you absolutely sure that MD5 key is the same on all routers?
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Rick Ernst
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 10:25 AM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] Odd
I'm trying to setup an IPv6 neighbor on a 7206VXR with NPE-G1 and
c7200-spservicesk9-mz.122-33.SRD4.bin. All the needed IPv6 config is
there (e.g. ipv6 cef) but BGP keeps telling me:
7200(config)#router bgp $ASN1
7200(config-router)#neigh X::X remote-as $ASN2
% Link local peer outside
What address scope are you using?
Leah
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Tomas Lynch
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 11:40 AM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] BGP IPV6 strange message
I'm
Global scope, I'm working on a lab and assigned 2201::/64, the side
with problems side is 2201::2 and the other 2201::1
Anyway, I have tried to setup the neighbor command with different
global IPv6 addresses and I'm always having the same result.
Thanks Leah.
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:55 PM,
Am 04.03.2010 20:40, schrieb Tomas Lynch:
I'm trying to setup an IPv6 neighbor on a 7206VXR with NPE-G1 and
c7200-spservicesk9-mz.122-33.SRD4.bin. All the needed IPv6 config is
there (e.g. ipv6 cef) but BGP keeps telling me:
7200(config)#router bgp $ASN1
7200(config-router)#neigh X::X
Hello Tomas,
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Tomas Lynch
Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 1:40 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] BGP IPV6 strange message
I'm trying to setup an IPv6
Hi all,
This is a rather basic question, but it's my first attempt at rate
limiting a non-receive interface on a Cisco device.
Cisco recommends a particular mathematical formula when using the
rate-limit command, which I've executed in the example below.
After scouring the web and Cisco docs, I
26 matches
Mail list logo
