Re: [c-nsp] VSS w/non sup VSL

2011-06-18 Thread Graham Wooden
On 6/18/11 4:32 PM, "Andrew Miehs" wrote: > On Saturday, June 18, 2011, Graham Wooden wrote: > >> I wouldn't assume that if a SUP-based VSL link fails that it's the SUPs >> fault.  It depends on your environment; our campus (a dirty manufacturing >> complex), we are constantly fighting SM fi

Re: [c-nsp] VSS w/non sup VSL

2011-06-18 Thread Andrew Miehs
On Saturday, June 18, 2011, Andrew Miehs wrote: > > > We orginally made the mistake as per cisco rcommendation of having on > in the sup and the other on a 6708 - software sxi4. > As previously stated, we used the second interface on the sup720 as > one of the uplinks (etherchannel) to the core sw

Re: [c-nsp] VSS w/non sup VSL

2011-06-18 Thread Andrew Miehs
On Saturday, June 18, 2011, Graham Wooden wrote: > I wouldn't assume that if a SUP-based VSL link fails that it's the SUPs > fault.  It depends on your environment; our campus (a dirty manufacturing > complex), we are constantly fighting SM fiber strand issues all the time. I think the issue bei

Re: [c-nsp] IPV6 on npe-g1 and npe-g2

2011-06-18 Thread Nick Hilliard
On 18/06/2011 17:58, Mark Kent wrote: I'm looking for real-world recommendations on IOS for adding IPV6 support on an npe-g1 and npe-g2. Current npe-g1, 12.2(25)S5, has been up for 3 years, 31 weeks, and I am interested in a version that will yield similar stability :-) BGP, OSPF, PA-MC-T3, MLP

Re: [c-nsp] vpn issues

2011-06-18 Thread Michael K. Smith - Adhost
You are not NAT'ing from 10.200.200.0/24 which is the address pool for your VPN clients. If you want to get out over the net you will have to remove the line below. Mike On 6/17/11 2:18 PM, "Bill Duffy" wrote: >access-list nonat extended permit ip 10.200.200.0 255.255.255.0 any _

Re: [c-nsp] per subnet rate limit

2011-06-18 Thread Aftab Siddiqui
Yes it will certainly serve the purpose. On Friday, June 17, 2011, Mohammad Khalil wrote: > > hi > > i have STM-1 connected to ME6524 > i am advertising 8 /24 subnets > i want to limit the speed given for each subnet > for example subnet 1 20M , subnet 2 30 M and so on > MQC will help me in this

[c-nsp] IPV6 on npe-g1 and npe-g2

2011-06-18 Thread Mark Kent
I'm looking for real-world recommendations on IOS for adding IPV6 support on an npe-g1 and npe-g2. Current npe-g1, 12.2(25)S5, has been up for 3 years, 31 weeks, and I am interested in a version that will yield similar stability :-) BGP, OSPF, PA-MC-T3, MLPPP and "ip verify unicast source rea

Re: [c-nsp] VSS w/non sup VSL

2011-06-18 Thread Graham Wooden
On 6/18/11 12:21 PM, "scott owens" wrote: > We are doing the sup based dual link VSL. > we reclaimed older 6704 for 10Gb uplinks / downlinks because at the time we > did not need the 6708s ... which would allow us to do sup & line card VSL. > Our thought is that if the sup based VSL fails ... od

[c-nsp] VSS w/non sup VSL

2011-06-18 Thread scott owens
We are doing the sup based dual link VSL. we reclaimed older 6704 for 10Gb uplinks / downlinks because at the time we did not need the 6708s ... which would allow us to do sup & line card VSL. Our thought is that if the sup based VSL fails ... odds are high (100% ?) that the sup itself failed and t

[c-nsp] ISSU on VSS

2011-06-18 Thread scott owens
> > 8. Re: VSS - Horror stories, show-stoppers, other personal > experience? (Tony Varriale) > I am pretty sure Tony that when I took the VSS class at Networkers last June in Las Vegas one of the benefits of the SXI4 code was that with dual sups ... you got ISSU. I am so sure of it becaus

Re: [c-nsp] VSS - Horror stories, show-stoppers, other personal experience?

2011-06-18 Thread Tony Varriale
Btw - i would recommend using both 10g ports on the sup720 10g for the vss links. Yes, this is super recommended. There is more than the obviously benefit of using these links. tv ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.n

Re: [c-nsp] VSS - Horror stories, show-stoppers, other personal experience?

2011-06-18 Thread Bradley Williamson
We used it in a large multicast environment, and it did not scale well. We have ~300 channels and we ran into problems with multicast LTL resources on the VSS. We originally went VSS for port density, MEC(L3), and the benefit of no spanning tree convergence. We had to split the VSS this week

[c-nsp] VSS - Horror stories, show-stoppers, other personal experience?

2011-06-18 Thread Andrew Miehs
On Saturday, June 18, 2011, Alexander Clouter wrote: > Murphy, William wrote: >> >> We are running VSS for distribution layer switching in a campus >> environment and have been quite pleased with it...  Benefits for us >> are simplification, faster convergence and better performance >> (distribut

[c-nsp] Preformance proiblems with Nexus5K and 2K 10G to 1G

2011-06-18 Thread Arne Larsen / Region Nordjylland
Hi all Has anyone use iperf for testing performance trough Nexus 5000 and 2000. I'm trying to find a problem with EMC nfs-share on 10Gb interace towards 1Gb interface. If I user iperf as a client on the 10G link and as a server on the 1G link, and the only way I can max the link out, is with a w

Re: [c-nsp] VSS - Horror stories, show-stoppers, other personal experience?

2011-06-18 Thread Alexander Clouter
Murphy, William wrote: > > We are running VSS for distribution layer switching in a campus > environment and have been quite pleased with it... Benefits for us > are simplification, faster convergence and better performance > (distribution of traffic)... > Only curious, VSS we (a small univ