Sup2T was because the Sup720 is already 6 years old and I don't know if
it is going to last another 6 years. That's why I decided to ask on this
thread. You all seem pretty enthusiast about it.
On 21/01/2012 00:33, Phil Mayers wrote:
On 01/20/2012 10:11 PM, Alessandra Forti wrote:
The
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 06:19, James Bensleyjwbens...@gmail.com wrote:
I can have dual RSPs but how likely are they too fail? I want to know
from 7600's owners/managers out there, how many SUPs or RSPs have you
had fail on you (or not if non have failed on you), and how long were
they in
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 07:29:26PM -0500, Jon Lewis wrote:
We do this with single supervisors, and a full redundant identically
configured chassis. Customer's who care get a link to each chassis.
Same here. Not that much hardware outage over the last years (one
Sup720-10G arrived DOA,
Many of you are mentioning dual-homed customers, which of course is always
an option. What I meant though is that it's very rare to find a set up
where every single customer is dual-homed. So, in a typical deployment,
do your line cards fail long before a SUP/RSP, or vice versa? For those
that
On 1/21/12 8:28 AM, James Bensley wrote:
Many of you are mentioning dual-homed customers, which of course is always
an option. What I meant though is that it's very rare to find a set up
where every single customer is dual-homed. So, in a typical deployment,
do your line cards fail long before a
Has anyone experienced a situation where GBIC occasionally does not
transmit properly with required power? I had a WS-G5486 GBIC in
WS-X4306-GB module connected to a SFP in another switch and all of the
sudden link started to flap with 4-6min intervals. It had been stable
for years. Rx power at
Hi,
I am trying to understand what does it mean when cisco says that we
need es+20 card for 7600 facing the core.
Does it mean that we must use 7600 as access switch in order to
provide VPLS to our customeers or we could use
for example 2960 as access with trunks to 7600?
I guess not, but ...
Hi Pavel
You should use either ES-cards or SIP-cards core facing. For access you can use
any sort of interfaces, either LAN-cards or dedicated access switches such as
the 2960S-series and like.
Lars Christensen
CCIE #20292
Den 21/01/2012 kl. 16.49 skrev Pavel Dimow:
Hi,
I am trying
Can one not use ES ports as LAN facing interfaces or 2960 uplink interfaces in
a VPLS environment?
I know they can be used as such in an EoMPLS environment with non-ES core
facing interfaces.
--
Sent from my mobile device
On 2012-01-21, at 11:24 AM, Lars Christensen perseu...@gmail.com
On Friday, January 20, 2012 08:19:19 PM James Bensley wrote:
Are they more likely to fail the other line cards? It
doesn't seem very common practice to have to of every
card in the chassis and provide customers with a port on
two switching modules for example, so why dual RSPs? Are
they
Hi Lars,
that means that we need just one 7600 with ES card and we can have as
many 2960 for example as access switches as long as they are connected
to this 7600 or they don't need to be directly connected to this 7600?
I just can figure out whats so special that ES cards do when they are
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 11:30:48AM -0500, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
Can one not use ES ports as LAN facing interfaces or 2960 uplink interfaces
in a VPLS environment?
VPLS requires extra processing towards the MPLS core which can only be
done by ES and SIP cards. See the cisco-nsp archives.
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 06:45:25PM +0100, Pavel Dimow wrote:
I just can figure out whats so special that ES cards do when they are
connected to core switches.
You could just read the thread that covered *this*, here in the list,
about two weeks ago...
ES and SIP cards have brains, and for
Dirty connectors?
Connector not fully seated in GBIC/SFP?
Problem went away when you mechanically exercised the links ?
Did you take the DUT (device under test) and put it back into the same scenario
where it was failing to see if the failure continues ?
If the failure didn't continue then I
(... and this is reason #1 why we are not using VSS)
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
We have two data centers, one with VSS one with 2 * 7Ks.
Both DC have 5548s and UCS chassis with L2 extended between both.
I can create a 40Gb or 80Gb port channel from the VSS to
Inside of Cisco brand maybe not. Outside of Cisco definitely possible.
On Jan 21, 2012 5:02 PM, chris stand cstand...@gmail.com wrote:
(... and this is reason #1 why we are not using VSS)
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
We have two data centers, one with VSS
On 2012-01-21, at 12:55 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
I know they can be used as such in an EoMPLS environment with non-ES core
facing interfaces.
EoMPLS can be used with plain LAN cards on Sup720-3B and up.
What I should have said was using ES ports as LAN facing interfaces allows you
to use
On Sunday, January 22, 2012 08:01:01 AM Jason Lixfeld wrote:
What I should have said was using ES ports as LAN facing
interfaces allows you to use locally significant VLANs
instead of riddling a box with SVIs.
Indeed, but if only the ES line cards were cheap enough to
do this at scale.
But
18 matches
Mail list logo
