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
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
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
--- 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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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:
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
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
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
15 matches
Mail list logo