On 12/20/2012 12:52 AM, Drew Weaver wrote:
I'm almost certain that this is 'newer' functionality, like SXI5+
It's been a while since I ran into this, but I thought it did it way
back on early SXF. I could be mistaken however.
Does anyone know if there is a way to disable it?
That I
Hi all
I have configured MPLS TE with RSVP using ISIS inside the MPLS core
R2 and R4 are my PE routers
R2#sh run int tun0
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 259 bytes
!
interface Tunnel0
ip unnumbered Loopback0
tunnel mode mpls traffic-eng
tunnel destination 4.4.4.4
tunnel
Hi,
Please post all of your configurations and not just the Tunnels, plus the usual
TE verification show commands such as show mpls traffic-eng tunnels, show
mpls traffic-eng topology
Cheers,
Joe
Sent from my iPhone
On 20/12/2012, at 21:05, M K gunner_...@live.com wrote:
Hi all
I have
On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 19:52 -0500, Drew Weaver wrote:
You cannot un-shut the new VLAN until you remove the downed VLAN
completely.
When we create the new VLAN we do 'no shut' and it gives an error
about an overlap.
For me it does warn about the overlap, but as soon as I shut the old SVI
I
R2
router isis 1
net 49.0001...0002.00
is-type level-2-only
metric-style wide
passive-interface Loopback0
mpls traffic-eng router-id Loopback0
mpls traffic-eng level-2
R2#sh run | sec router bgp
router bgp 100
bgp log-neighbor-changes
no bgp default ipv4-unicast
neighbor
Hi
how the forwarding will be if i have 2 parallel links between two routers one
with mpls enable and the 2nd without mpls ? suppose to see both in cef ? right
one with lable and the 2nd with out label ? any reply
BR
ZH
___
cisco-nsp mailing list
HI,
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 04:46:23AM -0800, zaid wrote:
how the forwarding will be if i have 2 parallel links between two routers one
with mpls enable and the 2nd without mpls ? suppose to see both in cef ?
right
one with lable and the 2nd with out label ? any reply
You're trying to
No,not like that
I have this conncection in my core and i want to troubleshooting the link with
mpls enabled.
From: Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de
To: zaid zaidoo...@yahoo.com
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Thursday,
On 20.12.2012, at 19:46, zaid zaidoo...@yahoo.com wrote:
how the forwarding will be if i have 2 parallel links between two routers one
with mpls enable and the 2nd without mpls ? suppose to see both in cef ?
right
one with lable and the 2nd with out label ? any reply
correct.
Still missing relevant informations, but I guess you miss the backup-path TE
configuration on your protecting core interfaces.
On 20.12.2012, at 19:38, M K gunner_...@live.com wrote:
R2
router isis 1
net 49.0001...0002.00
is-type level-2-only
metric-style wide
passive-interface
On 20.12.2012, at 09:54, Harald Kapper h...@kapper.net wrote:
I'd be happy to receive recommendations whether to go the ASR-1000 route or
skip this and go directoy to 760x-systems (using which RSP/SUP?).
Relevant question is here really how much interfaces and how much bandwidth do
you
On 2012-12-20 05:05 PM, M K wrote:
Now , the explicit path is working fine , when I shutdown one of the
links across the MPLS backbone , the tunnel interfaces become up
again
due to the dynamic path configured under the tunnel interface
Now , when I remove the dynamic and configure FRR
Doesn't seem to get rid of it. Here's what I just now did...
- Rebooted.still there.
- Tried to conf tno int g0/25got message that I can't remove
hardware int
- Downloaded nvram:startup-configremoved g0/25 from ascii
fileuploaded startup-config to nvram...verified g0/25
Hi, need to create protection tunnel that will protect the link or node
whichever is required.
On Dec 20, 2012 7:02 PM, Jefri Abdullah m...@jefri.info wrote:
On 2012-12-20 05:05 PM, M K wrote:
Now , the explicit path is working fine , when I shutdown one of the
links across the MPLS
On 20/12/2012 02:54, Harald Kapper wrote:
we're currently on 7206VXR with NPE-G2 and NPE-G1 on our network.
We need the following main features: IPv6+v4 dual-stack, Gigabit and
multi-Gigabit speeds for our upstreams, full BGP-tables,
broadband-aggregation (currently built on lots of C2851
So to summarize what Christian and Jefri said.
First you need to create a te-tunnel than bypasses the link you'd like to
protect.
Than you need to instruct that link to use the te-tunnel as backup path.
Last you'd configure the tunnel mpls traffic-eng fast-reroute bw-protect on
the primary
how the forwarding will be
Broken
Suppose you see both as valid paths for a given NH in cef i.e. load-sharing
is in place -that 1/2 of the traffic is going to be lost due to missing
label
adam
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Hello friend,
I think it depends on the IGP metric that is working as backbone routing..!
Suppose, you have lowest metric through the LSP..It should prefer over
another path..
HTH..
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 6:31 PM, zaid zaidoo...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi
how the forwarding will be if i have 2
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 07:25:08PM -0500, Joe Maimon wrote:
Jared, All,
Yes a security bug might warrant such a response. However, its quite
hard to see how this particular issue is one, and they arent saying.
If you experienced the bug and it is security related, they
should refer
4500x with 16x10GE now cost only $16K, so $1K for one 10GE port + VSS for
free and much more ;)
**
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at
Hi,
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:41:55PM +0400, stasm wrote:
4500x with 16x10GE now cost only $16K, so $1K for one 10GE port + VSS for
free and much more ;)
Yeah, the 4500-X looks quite good. Alas, it seems to be a bit hard to
actually *get* one - our suppliers quote 6-8 weeks which usually
Is anyone using ASR1006/ESP40 as bras with 64k dual-stack PPPoE sessions?
I would be interested in hearing opinions/comments and especially stats about
cpu/mem usage.
Cisco is (as always) too cryptic about actual customers doing that.
--
Tassos
___
I have configured a VTP domain and a VTP password on all the switches,
however changes to the vlan database and other VTP information are not
propagated to all the switches, or sometimes to some of the switches.
The possible reason is that some ports are in access mode though
configured for
23 matches
Mail list logo
