It's basically saying you can disable the PE specific check for down-bit
In other words it supports the cmd: capability vrf-lite
It's the same cmd in IOs and IOS-XR
adam
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Xu
Hi,
I think may I deleted the original post(s) in this thread, but has anyone
mentioned LISP.
one possibility is to have a big NAT box on the edge of the network, then their
address can be changed to whatever you need internally
but they are seen on the same address externally. messy and
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 16:22 +0100, Steve McCrory wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 15:54 +0100, Peter Rathlev wrote:
Same load in packets per second or in bits per second? The former is
the real bottleneck.
Both, quite significantly.
Would increasing the hold-queue help? The router is not
OSPFv3 VRF-Lite/PE-CE
adam
From: Xu Hu [mailto:jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 11:52 AM
To: adam vitkovsky
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] OSPFv3 support for IOS and IOS-XR
which one means you can disable the pe specific check for down-bit?
For this OSPFv3 VRF-Lite/PE-CE, is support the ospfv3 between PE and CE
under vrf.
Don't quiet understand what you mean.
2012/6/22 adam vitkovsky adam.vitkov...@swan.sk
OSPFv3 VRF-Lite/PE-CE
** **
adam
** **
*From:* Xu Hu [mailto:jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Friday, June 22,
Recently we are checking the OSPFv3 VRF support for IOS and IOS-XR.
Through the Cisco Feature Navigator, i found two related, one is MPLS VPN
OSPFv3 PE-CE, another one is OSPFv3 VRF-Lite/PE-CE, i don't know whether
this two are the same or not.
My understanding is that OSPFv3 VRF-Lite/PE-CE
This would be used when the datacenter router RIB is divided into accounting
VRF and sales VRF -each running OSPF and the router needs to be able to
route between these two VRFs
adam
From: Xu Hu [mailto:jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2012 3:15 PM
To: adam vitkovsky
Cc:
So you mean this is not for the OSPFv3 support between PE and CE under
VRF(The interface towards CE belong to one VRF in PE router)?
2012/6/22 adam vitkovsky adam.vitkov...@swan.sk
This would be used when the datacenter router RIB is divided into
accounting VRF and sales VRF –each running OSPF
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 03:02:58PM +1000, Andrew Jones wrote:
I think may I deleted the original post(s) in this thread, but has anyone
mentioned LISP.
Seems like a perfect use case for it.
Yay, tunnels, to compensate for lack of routing clue.
(Did I mention we changed one of our
Hi tiger,
pls check this link regarding vrf-lite.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2sb/feature/guide/vrflitsb.html#wp1047652
Thanks
Mingjun Zhao
At 2012-06-22 21:14:41,Xu Hu jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com wrote:
For this OSPFv3 VRF-Lite/PE-CE, is support the ospfv3 between PE and CE
under
Hi all, I'm the origin of this question (I'm not sure if I should be
admitting that or not) (lol)
Did you'll think when I said customers that I meant customers with
networks ? (I guess I'm asking this now based on some of the responses I've
seen) please forgive me if I wasn't clear enough
This is an ideal use case for PPPoE. We just return RADIUS attribute
Framed-IP-Address to the access concentrator and off they go! As long as a
subscriber can get to PPPoE they can get that IP... doesn't even need to be the
same service type. IP allocation is as easy as a drop-down menu that
Thanks Ross. I've heard of pppoe but never used it. This is the first ISP
I've ever worked fortell then I was purely enterprise. Perhaps at least
it would make sense for my single static ip customers to be setup with pppoe
so I could gain this flexibility huh? I wonder if the same would be
Hello,
we have WLC in our corporate network as wireless solution and we use
certificates for client autentification (eap-tls). Now there are a few
colleagues with apple devices (iphone/ipad) and I can't find a way to
authenticate them as all other clients. I have tried to use iphone
configuration
On 6/22/12 1:03 PM, Ross Halliday wrote:
This is an ideal use case for PPPoE. We just return RADIUS attribute
Framed-IP-Address to the access concentrator and off they go! As long as a
subscriber can get to PPPoE they can get that IP... doesn't even need to be
the same service type. IP
http://kamcobank.com//wp-content/plugins/wp-symposium/uploads/wnhhtr.html
___
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/
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 01:42:15PM -0500, Aaron wrote:
we are gonna do this type of thing soon
Guy with windows pc with single static ip on
it--dslamcisco me3600x(pe)---mpls---cisco
asr9k(p)-9k(p)-(more
p's)9k(pe)---same7609---internet
Thanks Ross. I've heard of pppoe but never used it. This is the first
ISP I've ever worked fortell then I was purely enterprise.
Oh, well... ISP is good times :) Lots more things to break!
Perhaps at least
it would make sense for my single static ip customers to be setup with
pppoe
On 22/06/2012 22:11, Gert Doering wrote:
Why on earth would anyone want multiple customers in the same broadcast
domain? Besides make life harder?
Because it allows multicast to work with optimal core-customer efficiency.
Also, dslams can be vaguely smart about broadcast management control,
On Friday, June 22, 2012 5:34 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
The dsl link I'm on at the moment uses bridged ethernet + shared
broadcast
domain on the service provider side, with dslam arp spoofing. The
reason
for this was that the SP built the network to run iptv over dsl, but
later
found out
Please know that when I say single static ip address for customer(s) in
my
subject heading, I mean a residential dsl subscriber with a windows
computer
sitting on his desk in his master bedroom and he bought a single static ip
address from me (the isp I work for). This is the context of my
On 22/06/2012 22:39, Ross Halliday wrote:
That's a bit of a surprise - in our experience the content providers are
very strict about how things get delivered. We run STBs directly to
dedicated ports on the modems and split Internet and IPTV traffic into
separate PVCS... and ne'er the twain
Hi Guys
Perhaps a little off topic -
Are any of you using NTP appliances? I am in an enterprise environment. We
have also considered using a couple of my 6500s but my gut tells me that is
not a good thing (tm).
We will be getting a stratum 1 feed from a local datacenter provider - and
was
How many customers do you have? Doesn't this flood your routing table with
/32's? In the past I have routed blocks to each POP, and terminated PPPoE
at that POP. So, I have an aggregate route (/24, /25, whatever) from the
POP to my core/distribution site. This keeps my routing table relatively
Hi Andrew,
How many clients will associate? And how critical is it?
We run a couple of older/retired 1841 as ntp on IOS 15, stratum 2/3 - they
don't do anything else but do a good enough job with a few thousand clients.
On Jun 23, 2012 9:17 AM, Andrew Miehs and...@2sheds.de wrote:
Hi Guys
A good linux server will suffice.
6500s have a pretty wimpy CPU.
This is from a linux server with a cheap atom board:
assID=0 status=06f4 leap_none, sync_ntp, 15 events, event_peer/strat_chg,
version=ntpd 4.2.2p1@1.1570-o Fri Nov 18 13:21:21 UTC 2011 (1),
processor=x86_64,
Sent from a mobile device
On 23/06/2012, at 15:05, Mack McBride mack.mcbr...@viawest.com wrote:
A good linux server will suffice.
6500s have a pretty wimpy CPU.
This is from a linux server with a cheap atom board:
Agreed - If it were only me, I too would run a couple of boxes, but this
27 matches
Mail list logo
