thanks Pete for your answer,
you're quite right, RFC doesn't say one must implement this feature. in RFC2119
the meaning of SHOULD is defined :
SHOULDthis word, or the adjective RECOMMENDED mean that there may exist
valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but
Can you share some other information?
Sh ip route neighbor address
Where are you sourcing your bgp updates from?
Thanks,
//LeBlanc
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Lobo
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2010
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Lobo loboti...@gmail.com wrote:
I've tried searching around for this problem but haven't found much info.
We upgraded some 7301 routers the other night and there are a couple of
neighbors which have not been able to re-establish themselves. Debugging
from
Hi guys,
I ran into a weird issue in one of our load balancers (ACE 4710) and i was
wondering if you guys out there have found the same behavior. for a couple of
minutes all TCP probes failed but HTTP didn't, logs still show open and closed
connection to front end and back end servers. the
Hi here is the ouput:
sh ip route 172.29.2.2
Routing entry for 172.29.2.2/32
Known via ospf 1, distance 110, metric 5161, type intra area
Last update from 10.64.161.165 on GigabitEthernet0/2, 01:05:45 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 10.64.161.165, from 172.29.2.2, 01:05:45 ago, via
I've tried searching around for this problem but haven't found much
info.
We upgraded some 7301 routers the other night
to which software?
and there are a couple of
neighbors which have not been able to re-establish themselves.
Debugging from one of the routers shows this:
Nov 21
Well, we upgraded from 7206VXR NPEG1s to 7301 but the software went from
12.3(26) to 12.2(33)SRE1 as well.
The interfaces on both sides are all set to 9216 mtu but the path
between them is a lot less than that. Another thing that a colleague of
mine pointed out was that the distance between
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 02:07:13PM -, Antonio Soares wrote:
ACE30-UPG-04-K9=
Cisco ACE10 or ACE20 with 4-Gbps Throughput license to Cisco ACE30 with
4-Gbps (Entry) license
Is this just changing the daughter card? Or is it a completely new blade?
What's the list prices of these
It's a new blade.
Data Sheet
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/modules/ps2706/ps6906/data_sheet_c78_632383.html
Andras
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 02:07:13PM -, Antonio Soares wrote:
ACE30-UPG-04-K9=
Hi,
You can check the main features it supports in the Data Sheet.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps628/products_data_sheet09186a00801cfb71.html
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps628/product_data_sheet09186a00801cfb64.html
Andras
On Fri, Nov 19,
Honestly, 2950's are aging, EOL/EOS gear. If you have the money I'd go for
the 2960 series. If not, I'd go with something newer, but still supportable
in the same price range. The linksys business class switches would probably
do well here.
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Deric Kwok
Check the exit code at the time of probe failure in show probe probe_name
detail (Last status code)
Krunal
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Alex Wa awain...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi guys,
I ran into a weird issue in one of our load balancers (ACE 4710) and i was
wondering if you guys out
12 matches
Mail list logo
