Re: [c-nsp] MBGP for Multicast with VRF-Lite

2011-05-02 Thread Anton Kapela
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 10:43 AM, James Yunkin cisco2323...@yahoo.com wrote: How can one send multicast routes via BGP on a VRF-Lite router? you're screwed, perhaps do ebgp multihop session to something that can speak this AFI ;) -Tk ___ cisco-nsp

[c-nsp] Cisco 2811 and HWIC-1GE-SFP

2011-05-02 Thread Chris Knipe
Hi all, I'm in the process of planning an new edge router, and I'm currently looking at the Cisco 2811.. We need to have 2 x HWIC-1GE-SPF, 2 x WIC-1ADSL, and 2 x WIC-2T in the router. Looking at the datasheet of the 2811, it states that 4 slots are on board, capable of HWIC, WIC, VIC, or

[c-nsp] Cisco ME 3400 Switch + dot1.Q Tunneling

2011-05-02 Thread Dominic Ogbonna
Hi Everyone Just wondering if anyone here uses the Cisco ME 3400E Switch, and any comments on performance? Key feature needed would be Layer2 dot1.Q tunneling, and the other option is using the 3560G series. Dominic ___ cisco-nsp mailing list

Re: [c-nsp] MBGP for Multicast with VRF-Lite

2011-05-02 Thread James Yunkin
--- On Mon, 5/2/11, Anton Kapela tkap...@gmail.com wrote: you're screwed, perhaps do ebgp multihop session to something that can speak this AFI ;) How sad. :-) Any idea why this isn't supported? Cisco just doesn't feel like it? Juniper supports it easily.

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco ME 3400 Switch + dot1.Q Tunneling

2011-05-02 Thread sthaug
Just wondering if anyone here uses the Cisco ME 3400E Switch, and any comments on performance? Key feature needed would be Layer2 dot1.Q tunneling, and the other option is using the 3560G series. We use the ME-3400EG-12CS-M, mostly for the DC power supply and the possibility of using REP.

[c-nsp] Nexus and Microsoft Unicast NLB

2011-05-02 Thread Deny IP Any Any
Is anybody else connecting Microsoft NLB unicast cluster servers to a Cisco Nexus switch? Cisco TAC is telling me that the Nexus 5010 running 5.0(3)N1(1b) won't support NLB unicast mode, and I should just move to NLB Multicast or stick the NLB servers in their own VLAN. P1-N5K-1(config)# mac

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus and Microsoft Unicast NLB

2011-05-02 Thread James Slepicka (c-nsp)
I have NLB Unicast clusters running on FEXs hanging off of Nexus 5548s. In unicast mode, there's no need to define static mac entries since traffic will be flooded. I simply stick the clusters in dedicated VLANs. -Original Message- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net

[c-nsp] frame relay connect

2011-05-02 Thread Mohammad Khalil
hi all i have the below topology R1 S0/1 -- R3 S1/2 R3 1/3 -- R2 S0/1 R3 will act a frame relay switch , the configuration is as below R1: interface Serial0/1 ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0 encapsulation frame-relay frame-relay map ip 192.168.1.2 132 no frame-relay inverse-arp

[c-nsp] SXJ - The good, the bad, the ugly?

2011-05-02 Thread ML
SXJ appears to have been in the wild for about month. Has anyone been playing with it? Seen any nasty bugs yet? ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco ME 3400 Switch + dot1.Q Tunneling

2011-05-02 Thread Eric Cables
I'd also be interested in feedback on anyone with ME-3400/3600/3800 devices deployed, specifically wrt REP implementations. -- Eric Cables On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 12:18 PM, sth...@nethelp.no wrote: Just wondering if anyone here uses the Cisco ME 3400E Switch, and any comments on

[c-nsp] NX-OS 5.1 proxy l3

2011-05-02 Thread Tim Durack
What does an increased number of layer-3 forwarders (16 to 128) do for me in NX-OS 5.1? -- Tim: ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at

Re: [c-nsp] NX-OS 5.1 proxy l3

2011-05-02 Thread Tim Stevenson
It gives you more proxy L3 forwarding capacity in a mixed module chassis, ie your M1 modules doing routing on behalf of your F1 modules. Tim At 06:52 PM 5/2/2011, Tim Durack mused: What does an increased number of layer-3 forwarders (16 to 128) do for me in NX-OS 5.1? -- Tim:

Re: [c-nsp] NX-OS 5.1 proxy l3

2011-05-02 Thread Tim Durack
Okay, so 1 proxy forwarder = 1 SVI? I guess I'm trying to figure out how many SVIs I can proxy-route with an F1/M1 mix. I can't find any numbers anywhere. On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:46 PM, Tim Stevenson tstev...@cisco.com wrote: It gives you more proxy L3 forwarding capacity in a mixed module

Re: [c-nsp] NX-OS 5.1 proxy l3

2011-05-02 Thread Brad Hedlund (brhedlun)
If you have an M1/F1 mixed chassis, any given F1 card can use any and all M1 cards for L3 switching. Cheers, Brad Hedlund http://bradhedlund.com On May 2, 2011, at 8:59 PM, Tim Durack tdur...@gmail.com wrote: What does an increased number of layer-3 forwarders (16 to 128) do for me in

Re: [c-nsp] NX-OS 5.1 proxy l3

2011-05-02 Thread Tim Stevenson
The number of SVIs is not a factor (or no more so than for any system) - the question is how much bandwidth/thruput do you need for inter-vlan routing for those SVIs. Each M1 module you add to the system adds up to 80G of proxy L3 (assuming 10G M1 cards, and assuming you allow all M1 ports to