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
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
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
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
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
_
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
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
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
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
>
> 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
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
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
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
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
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
15 matches
Mail list logo