Hi,
On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 06:20:35PM -0400, chip wrote:
I've been screen scraping show interfaces accounting and taking the
data from the IPv6 row and shoving it into RRD. Be aware of the
following however:
The Pkts Out and Chars Out fields display IPv6 packet counts only. The
Pkts In
Hi Mark,
BGP c-mroute signaling with MLDP will be supported.
Regards,
Waris
-Original Message-
From: Mark Tinka [mailto:mark.ti...@seacom.mu]
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 2:48 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Cc: Waris Sagheer (waris); adam vitkovsky
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] p2mp te tunnels
Hi Sibbi,
From what the customer tells me their switch is configured as such. The
issue is not that computers marking packets does not work. That seems fine.
The issue is that if the switch is the device marking the packets, we see
dscp set to 0. Since we don't have access into their 3560, I can
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 11:32:28 AM Waris Sagheer (waris)
wrote:
Hi Mark,
BGP c-mroute signaling with MLDP will be supported.
Thanks for the response, Waris. A rough idea when, perhaps?
I'm hoping adding support for p2mp RSVP-TE will be obvious
in the future, as well :-).
Mark.
You need to see the configuration on their side.
The switch by default will set all dscp to 0 unless trust is configured. You
can also apply a policy-map that explicitly sets the dscp to a specific value.
Kind regards,
Sibbi
From: Lee Starnes
I think if you have both then trust overrides a policy-map rock to scissors.
It defo does on a 6500.
Sent from my iPad
On 22 May 2012, at 17:21, Sigurbjörn Birkir Lárussonsigurbjo...@vodafone.is
wrote:
You need to see the configuration on their side.
The switch by default will set all
On Sunday, May 20, 2012 07:57:41 AM Reuben Farrelly wrote:
It's also nice to be able to go from 1G to 10G by just
upgrading SFP's.
That's why we're looking at the 4500-X (Cisco) and EX4500
(Juniper), and ignoring the typical core switch devices like
the 6500, Nexus 7000 (Cisco) and EX8200,
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 16:00:09, Mark Tinka wrote:
Cc: scott owens
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Stacking 3750X vs diverse 4948E
On Sunday, May 20, 2012 07:57:41 AM Reuben Farrelly wrote:
It's also nice to be able to go from 1G to 10G by just upgrading
SFP's.
That's why we're looking at the
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:19:47 PM Ryan West wrote:
And you'll have VSS in the X. I realize the 5500 and
4500-X are positioned differently, but the 10G capacity
of the 4500-X does seem a little low for the price. I
guess it all depends on the feature set you need. What
are you needing
Hi,
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:42:20PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote:
For the price (or for what the price will be), the 4500-X
fits our bill quite nicely in both segments we're looking
at.
What sort of hardware is inside the 4500-X?
Pure L2, 3750-ish L3, or 6500-ish L3 (with Netflow, full
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:51:15 PM Gert Doering wrote:
Pure L2, 3750-ish L3, or 6500-ish L3 (with Netflow,
full tables, MPLS)?
Well, it supports hardware-based IPv4 (256,000 entries max.)
and IPv6 (128,000 entries max.). It will also do Multicast
in hardware (32,000 both for IPv4 and
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 16:42:20, Mark Tinka wrote:
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Stacking 3750X vs diverse 4948E
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:19:47 PM Ryan West wrote:
And you'll have VSS in the X. I realize the 5500 and 4500-X are
positioned differently, but the 10G capacity of the 4500-X does
Thus spake Gert Doering (g...@greenie.muc.de) on Tue, May 22, 2012 at
10:51:15PM +0200:
Hi,
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:42:20PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote:
For the price (or for what the price will be), the 4500-X
fits our bill quite nicely in both segments we're looking
at.
What sort
The X = a Sup7 in a box.
55k MAC. 128k ACL.
60 odd etherchannels and vrfs. Same same.
There was a nice thread with detail from the Cisco product manager here on
it a while back.
On May 23, 2012 7:04 AM, Mark Tinka mark.ti...@seacom.mu wrote:
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 10:51:15 PM Gert Doering
Hi
Imagine a town of 15.000-20.000 people. What type of device/devices
and size would you put into this town, given the following
requirements
Residential triple play (HSI, VoD, Multicast)
8 IP dslams (GigE)
Vod servers (4 GigE pors)
Business connections (L3VPN)
10 Business connections
Hi,
On 23 May 2012 10:30, MKS rekordmeis...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
Imagine a town of 15.000-20.000 people. What type of device/devices
and size would you put into this town, given the following
requirements
Residential triple play (HSI, VoD, Multicast)
8 IP dslams (GigE)
Vod servers (4
on a similar note, how do people address the situation of a server
doing bond0 to two different top of rack switches, and a switch uplink
fails? in this situation, the two tor switches are not connected (i
dislike spanning tree). the bond0 interface can't see that uplink
failure, and would
Pair of MX80s.
On May 22, 2012 5:33 PM, MKS rekordmeis...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi
Imagine a town of 15.000-20.000 people. What type of device/devices
and size would you put into this town, given the following
requirements
Residential triple play (HSI, VoD, Multicast)
8 IP dslams (GigE)
i've played with the eem stuff on 4948's, which kinda worked well.
On some models you can use link state tracking...which feels a bit
less kludgy to me than EEM. The ports just have to be configured as
upstream or downstream. It's not supported on the 6500 or N5K though
unfortunately.
Oliver
On Tuesday, May 22, 2012 11:38:56 PM Mick O'Rourke wrote:
The X = a Sup7 in a box.
55k MAC. 128k ACL.
60 odd etherchannels and vrfs. Same same.
There was a nice thread with detail from the Cisco
product manager here on it a while back.
And the 1U form-factor is great. Like Gert, we
20 matches
Mail list logo
