3750X ?
But no native 10G on copper, you'd need some X2 modules
Alan
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011, Martin T wrote:
Mikael,
what do you mean by "non-cisco coded optics"? Take a look at following example:
I mean the ones which do not have a cisco keyed idprom, ie wouldn't work
without "service unsupported-transciever".
--
Mikael Abrahamssonemail: swm...@swm.pp.se
_
Hi,
On 30 September 2011 03:48, Manuel Marín wrote:
> What about the post sales support with Huawei? We are currently testing with
> them and they are very friendly and helpful but I'm a little concern about
> post sale support.
YMMV depending on your local Huawei people (if you have them
avail
Is there a Cisco switch(non-modular preferably) which fulfils those
requirements:
1) 12 or more 1000BASE-T ports
2) 2x SFP port for 1000BASE-LX10 SFP's
3) 2x 10GBASE-T ports(for IBM 10Gb iSCSI Host Interface Card 81Y9613,
which has two 10GBASE-T interfaces)
First option would be Catalyst 4900M w
Jason,
I agree that preferring Cisco branded SFP's gives a sort of quality
guarantee. According to a friend of mine, those SFP's were bought from
a electronics market in Moscow:
http://img.nag.ru/images/18388/101019342.gif
http://img.nag.ru/images/18388/138043329.jpeg
http://img.nag.ru/images/1864
70% seems *really* high an for rsp720. Are you sure it's
not a sup720? The two have vastly different cpu performance
(about 10x it seems). I have several rsp720 with many full
bgp transit feeds + peer routes and my typical cpu usage is
only 10%. What IOS image are you running and what else are
Hey:
Can you get the more descriptive errors on the Catalyst side? That's
where the majority of errors are. I think it will do a "show int count
error" or similar.
By the way, did you see this?
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk801/tk703/technologies_tech_note09186a008
0094c4f.shtml
You might
On Sep 29, 2011, at 13:29, Phil Mayers wrote:
> Tim Durack wrote:
>
>> We are currently using the C6K in this role. The N7K is looking like
>> the logical replacement.
>
> Likwise. Hence my asking! I'm a bit disappointed that the current 10g cards
> on the n7k are only 8 (non-blocking) ports pe
Tim Durack wrote:
>We are currently using the C6K in this role. The N7K is looking like
>the logical replacement.
Likwise. Hence my asking! I'm a bit disappointed that the current 10g cards on
the n7k are only 8 (non-blocking) ports per slot though. Anyone know if there's
a higher density non-
Ask and you shall receive.
Hint
On Sep 29, 2011 3:41 PM, "Tim Durack" wrote:
> We are currently using the C6K in this role. The N7K is looking like
> the logical replacement.
>
> If Cisco produced a 10/100/1000/PoE FEX, and upgraded the N7K to
> support 100s of FEX on a chassis pair, we could
We are currently using the C6K in this role. The N7K is looking like
the logical replacement.
If Cisco produced a 10/100/1000/PoE FEX, and upgraded the N7K to
support 100s of FEX on a chassis pair, we could replace the entire
access layer with N7K plus FEX remote linecards. Now that would be
cool.
To be honest, that was our thought as well. We have a 7k down in the lab
right now and we are burning it up trying to get L3vpn, Mvpn, TE, RSVP,
6vpe, with all the usual fixings up and running. The only major area where a
real router blows the 7k out of the water is to do QOS. If you are looking
at
Hi Mike,
From the NPE-G1, it doesnt accept show int xx count error but here is
something
DSL1.THE#show int gi0/1 | i error
0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 177 overrun, 0 ignored
0 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets
On the NPE-G1
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
descript
Hi Peter,
Thanks for the reply.
We have two interconnects from the NPE-G1 back to the SUP32
GI0/1 (npe) > Gi1/7 (sup32) - copper native on npe, to brand new cisco 1000-T
SFP
GI0/3 (npe) > Gi1/4 (sup32) - fibre GBIC on npe, to brand new cisco SFP SX
The wierd thing is the CRC / Frame errors fol
Can you do a "sho int x/x count error"? Also, have you tried setting the MTU
to 1500 on both sides of the link? What is the MTU on the VLAN itself and for
the chassis?
Mike
--
Michael K. Smith - CISSP, GSEC, GISP
Chief Technical Officer - Adhost Internet LLC mksm...@adhost.com
w: +1 (206) 404-
I'm curious if anyone has any thoughts on this platform as an MPLS P/PE
router.
It probably seems odd, and that an ASR9k might be a more obvious choice,
but for an enterprise MPLS core router it has a few nice properties -
lots of 10gig, goes fast, decent OS and commonality of sparing and part
Sorry for the Spam. It was what I was alerting on in my syslog server.
Thanks
Scott
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Scott Voll wrote:
> I'm syslog'ing my routers at the informational level. But I have yet to
> see a EIGRP message about losing a neighbor, or anything like it, when we
> lo
Hi,
It seems you cannot disable flow-control on a NPE-G1 I'm running 12.3.6f
"My understanding is software based flow-control has been disabled on the 7200
because it was not scalable. But there is a cosmetic bug on the sh interface
which shown input flow control as XON instead of unsupport
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
> boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Alexander Fossa
> Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2011 8:10 AM
> To: cisco-nsp [cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net]
> Subject: [c-nsp] NPE-G1 Interface errors / packetloss
>
> H
On Thu, 2011-09-29 at 15:10 +, Alexander Fossa wrote:
> At first we thought it was a dirty fibre / failed SFP, both have been
> replaced but the problem continues.
...
> Show interface stats from SUP32
...
> Full-duplex, 1000Mb/s, media type is T
Have you checked the copper cable used here?
Hi,
We've been trying to diagnose a packetloss issue though one of our LNS's.
The NPE-G1 is connected directly to a SUP32 with traffic in the region of
50mbit.
At first we thought it was a dirty fibre / failed SFP, both have been replaced
but the problem continues.
We then moved the main infr
Probably this?
R1(config)#router eigrp 100
R1(config-router)#eigrp ?
event-log-size Set EIGRP maximum event log entries
event-logging Log IP-EIGRP routing events
log-neighbor-changes Enable/Disable IP-EIGRP neighbor logging
log-neighbor-warnings Enable/Disable IP-EIGRP
I'm syslog'ing my routers at the informational level. But I have yet to see
a EIGRP message about losing a neighbor, or anything like it, when we lose
the connection.
Do I need a different logging level to get this in a syslog message? is it
a bug? What am I missing?
Thanks
Scott
What about the post sales support with Huawei? We are currently testing with
them and they are very friendly and helpful but I'm a little concern about
post sale support.
Regards
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.n
The current 16x10G has 8 NPUs each and each NPU can do 15G, that's where
the 120G number comes from. Line rate without having to manage
oversubscription, not accounting for local traffic, would be 8x10GE. The
24x10G card has been announced and the new fabric should do ~200G/slot
full-duplex.
Ph
25 matches
Mail list logo
