So I spoke to Philip and he is happy to share his slides
with the public.
His FTP site is here:
http://thyme.apnic.net/ftp/isp-workshops
The slides you are interested in for IS-IS are under:
- Routing Presentations
For BGP, that would be under:
- BGP Presentations
Go
So the first issue, and probably the root of it, is you are calling the
FEX a "switch", and it's not a switch. It doesn't do any local switching
itself and the FEX ports do not support running STP, so it really is meant
to connect to L3 devices. There is no way to disable BPDUGuard.
If the switch
FEXs arent switches. Think of them as cheap line cards for host connections. If
you are staying in the cisco world buy multiple layer 2 n5500s or a 4510 with
the appropriate line cards. You could get this to work by disabling spanning
tree on the downstream switches, or just ensuring they dont s
Hi Everyone,
Thanks for the responses, I appreciate it.
Stephen,
I will probably stick with the 5000 series, maybe just use 5010's since I
have a pair at a facility I am shutting down, I will simply move them over.
Ray,
The TAC guy I was speaking with, said there might be a way to "trick" them
Follow-up... the secondary booted up OK. We're looking at a possible
RMA on the failing one (TAC case open) rather than cracking the case on
a virgin switch to mess with flash :).
Jeff
On 12/6/2013 11:25 PM, Jeff Kell wrote:
> We received our first pair of 4500X switches, and proceeded to try t
OK,
So I am wondering if anyone else has tested this upgrade...
Just got in a new pair of 5596UP switches, each configured with 2x 16 port UP
expansion modules. Went through the basic config of username, password, and
decline to do anything further like I always do right out of
Hi Everyone,
I knew I should have come here first but I went with the word of a CCXX
something or another (Director of IT) from a vendor and a couple links he
sent me. After I explained the setup I was putting together and how
everything needed to work together, he told me that the Nexus 2232PP S
Markus,
On 10 Dec 2013, at 21:19, Markus H wrote:
> I have found a Cisco Catalyst 4948-S to be less expensive on ebay than two
> 3750G-24 (and both options are far cheaper than any
> Juniper EX on ebay).
4948 without letter ‘E’ at the end signifies a version based on the
older Supervisor desig
The generated hot air is good for
drying the laundry in my cellar.
I was first unsure wether the air-humidity would harm,
but my home-servers still survive.
The depth of my rack is ok (HP/Compaq)
but it was hard to find one less than 1,8 m .
Boing...Ouch my head...allways duck when going thru do
Hi, all,
Am 10.12.2013 um 21:19 schrieb Markus H :
> I have found a Cisco Catalyst 4948-S to be less expensive on ebay than two
> 3750G-24 (and both options are far cheaper than any Juniper EX on ebay).
If you can get one cheap, go for it. My used gear supplier swears by them
and I just bought th
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 10:19:53 PM Markus H wrote:
> So the benefit of a 4948 would be bigger buffers (and
> therefore less problems from microbursts), the benefit
> of a pair of 3750Gs would be that I don't have to buy
> them at once and I have some redundancy. So I think I
> would prefer
Thanks for the input so far.
I have found a Cisco Catalyst 4948-S to be less expensive on ebay than two
3750G-24 (and both options are far cheaper than any Juniper EX on ebay).
So the benefit of a 4948 would be bigger buffers (and therefore less
problems from microbursts), the benefit of a pair o
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 09:13:14 PM Nick Hilliard
wrote:
> they would probably be very good for the job on a small
> network, yes.
The 3825 should be good. With 1GB RAM, it could skate by
with two full tables and decent CPU utilization. I'm not
sure it will handle more than that.
If you
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 09:27:26 PM Patrick M. Hausen
wrote:
> - when all old systems and OSPF are retired, add
> route-reflector and iBGP (with a conveniently larger
> administrative distance than IS-IS by default) - narrow
> IS-IS to just the backbone links one external link at a
> time w
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 07:25:27 PM Steve Housego
wrote:
> Are there any good resources that detail best current
> practice for route reflector design?
>
> Google doesn't bring up much real-world experience, i.e.
> detailing caveats, redundancy options etc..
I only teach the slides; Phili
Hi,
Am 10.12.2013 um 20:13 schrieb Nick Hilliard :
> On 10/12/2013 18:28, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
>> Can an IOS router serve as a route reflector? Once I have the C6500 in
>> production I have two spare 3825 that feature 1 GB of RAM each and
>> should thus have suficcient resources, specifically
On 10/12/2013 18:28, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> Can an IOS router serve as a route reflector? Once I have the C6500 in
> production I have two spare 3825 that feature 1 GB of RAM each and
> should thus have suficcient resources, specifically when they are not
> busy routing traffic, anymore.
they
Am 10.12.2013 um 18:45 schrieb Patrick M. Hausen :
> I see. I’m starting with 4 routers and I simply do not have the hardware
> at hand *now* to implement something that critical to my network.
> Of course a VM will do, but I do not have free virtual ressources with
> sufficient redundancy, either.
Are there any good resources that detail best current practice for route
reflector design?
Google doesn't bring up much real-world experience, i.e. detailing caveats,
redundancy options etc..
SteveH
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf
Hi, all,
Am 10.12.2013 um 13:43 schrieb Justin M. Streiner :
> On 10/Dec/2013 at 09:22:01 AM, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
>> I do have the knowledge and capacity to implement iBGP as my IGP
>> *now*, except for the route reflectors suggested. Would you recommend
>> that approach? I.e. going without
On 10/Dec/2013 at 09:22:01 AM, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
I do have the knowledge and capacity to implement iBGP as my IGP
*now*, except for the route reflectors suggested. Would you recommend
that approach? I.e. going without the route reflectors and the
communities first? It~Rs only 4-5 machines
Hi,
I have a question regarding redistributing routes from BGP to OSPF in a L3VPN
setup. I've got limited experience in this area, so please excuse if the
question is incorrectly formulated.
The topology is like this
P -- PE1 -- CE1
| |
PE2 - PE3
|\ /|
| \ / |
| X |
|
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 04:27:48 PM Nick Hilliard
wrote:
> It would be less work overall to install the RRs first.
> It's not that difficult either. Just remember to use
> next-hop self for all ibgp sessions. Otherwise see Phil
> Smith's BGP 101 presentation that Mark mentioned.
What Ni
On 10/12/2013 14:22, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> I do have the knowledge and capacity to implement iBGP as my IGP *now*,
> except for the route reflectors suggested. Would you recommend that
> approach? I.e. going without the route reflectors and the communities
> first? It’s only 4-5 machines in t
Hi, all,
Am 10.12.2013 um 14:10 schrieb Mark Tinka :
> On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 11:31:55 AM Patrick M. Hausen
> wrote:
>> And OTOH again - why would I not want to carry < 100 LSAs
>> in my IGP?
>
> Because you should always assume you will grow. Having to
> re-design the network in the fut
Hi,
Can't help you with the N7K, have no experience with them. But we deployed a
couple Nexus 6001 recently, running NX-OS 6.0(2)N2(2).
We use exclusively third party SFP and SFP+, from a local supplier, in these
without any problem. The SFPs are coded as Cisco in the EPROM, we don't need to
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 11:41:10 AM Patrick M. Hausen
wrote:
> Most ISPs I know who run OSPF configure it the way I
> described with very narrow „network“ statements and
> explicit redistribution. Essentially my subscriber lines
> are from the IGP’s point of view not part of my AS and
> eve
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 11:31:55 AM Patrick M. Hausen
wrote:
> I must admit, the thought never occured to me up until
> now. That’s what I thought IGPs were for. Use BGP to
> talk to your upstream, use a suitable link state IGP for
> your own network.
>
> Any hints/documents/links for star
Hi, Nick,
Am 10.12.2013 um 10:43 schrieb Nick Hilliard :
> On 10/12/2013 09:31, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
>> How can I connect them to the iBGP without them carrying full tables?
>> Route-maps for the neighbor definitions? Is that really all it takes?
>>
>> And OTOH again - why would I not want to
On 10/12/2013 8:43 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
If you want to do it with BGP, I'd recommend setting up a couple of VMs to
act as route reflectors (with e.g. bird or quagga or something) and
creating a very simple BGP community policy: tag your transit prefixes,
your peering prefixes and your interna
On 10/12/2013 09:31, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> How can I connect them to the iBGP without them carrying full tables?
> Route-maps for the neighbor definitions? Is that really all it takes?
>
> And OTOH again - why would I not want to carry < 100 LSAs in my IGP?
if it's 100 LSAs, there's not goin
Hi!
Am 10.12.2013 um 10:14 schrieb Mark Tinka :
> "passive-interface" in IS-IS basically means:
>
> - If an interface is defined as passive.
> - Advertise whatever IP address is on it.
> - But don't run IS-IS on it.
Yep. That sums it up quite nicely, which is why I’m citing it
Hi,
looks like I opened quite a can of worms, here … :-)
Thanks to everybody for the valuable input.
Am 10.12.2013 um 10:19 schrieb Nick Hilliard :
> On 10/12/2013 08:42, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
>> I’ve been doing OSPF for quite some years and IMHO this is a perfectly valid
>> and
>> sane way t
On 10/12/2013 08:42, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> I’ve been doing OSPF for quite some years and IMHO this is a perfectly valid
> and
> sane way to run an ISP with subscriber lines. And I know more than one
> competitor
> (friendly competition ;-) doing exactly the same.
Why don't you use ibgp for
On Tuesday, December 10, 2013 10:42:34 AM Patrick M. Hausen
wrote:
> This enables OSPF on the link to my other router *only*.
> OSPF does not by default redistribute connected or
> static routes. The 0.0.0.0 looks insane but keep in mind
> that it’s an inverted (wildcard) mask so essentially it
>
Morning,
Am 09.12.2013 um 16:26 schrieb Mark Tinka :
> On Monday, December 09, 2013 03:05:17 PM Patrick M. Hausen
> wrote:
>
>> Just to make sure i would not accidentally inject
>> anything not belonging to my AS into my IGP.
>
> Why would you, if you're running IS-IS only on your internal
> l
36 matches
Mail list logo
