Re: [c-nsp] cisco ISR 881

You could be hitting export control limits. The smaller platforms are limited to the throughputs mentioned in your second document in order to meet export control requirements. Only the larger platforms can exceed these amounts with a HSEC license, but unfortunately this license isn't

Re: [c-nsp] Peering with AS larger than 65535

On Wed, 30 Apr 2014, CiscoNSP List wrote: Have an oldish 7200-G2 in the lab that I need to setup with test peering with an AS larger than 65535 - It does not accept asdot notation (i.e. throws an error when I enter the converted AS - It doesnt like the .). Why do you want to use the asdot

Re: [c-nsp] Peering with AS larger than 65535

Have an oldish 7200-G2 in the lab that I need to setup with test peering with an AS larger than 65535 - It does not accept asdot notation (i.e. throws an error when I enter the converted AS - It doesnt like the .). Why do you want to use the asdot notation? The 7200 wouldnt accept

Re: [c-nsp] Peering with AS larger than 65535

Have an oldish 7200-G2 in the lab that I need to setup with test peering with an AS larger than 65535 - It does not accept asdot notation (i.e. throws an error when I enter the converted AS - It doesnt like the .). AS65535 = Peer with AS23456 This is its purpose. Otherwise on your 7200

Re: [c-nsp] Peering with AS larger than 65535

On 30.4.2014 03:06, Jeremy Bresley wrote: On 4/29/2014 7:11 PM, CiscoNSP List wrote: Have an oldish 7200-G2 in the lab that I need to setup with test peering with an AS larger than 65535 Is there any work-around to this? (Aside from IOS upgrade) If you don't have IOS support, it's not going

[c-nsp] WS-X6908-10GE Crashes

Hello group, I have a situation where a WS-X6908-10GE is crashing. The crashinfos have this: Apr 25 xx:xx:xx: %EARL_L3_ASIC-DFC7-3-RMA: EARL L3 ASIC 0: fatal interrupt PO block adjacency statistics data for read is unavailable Anyone has seen something similar ? The problem is that

[c-nsp] TCAM debugging fun on 3560X

Hi guys, I inherited a set of 3560X a while ago, and they are being used for L3, v4 and v6, and - worst of all - filtering. I'm constantly hitting the deck with the ACLs: #sh platform tcam util CAM Utilization for ASIC# 0 MaxUsed

[c-nsp] 6880-X XL vs. ASR

Looking at some potential edge redesign options when comparing 6880-X-XL [larger route table @ 2M IPv4] ASR1004/1006 platforms. Thinking about leaving the edge routers to ASR's (could be more than 4 carriers - 1 per ASR) and then route-reflecting down to the new L3 core/distribution. Moving

[c-nsp] Cisco Security Advisory: Multiple Vulnerabilities in Cisco TelePresence System MXP Series

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Multiple Vulnerabilities in Cisco TelePresence System MXP Series Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20140430-mxp Revision 1.0 For Public Release 2014 April 30 16:00 UTC (GMT) Summary === Cisco TelePresence System MXP Series Software contains

[c-nsp] Cisco Security Advisory: Multiple Vulnerabilities in Cisco TelePresence TC and TE Software

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Multiple Vulnerabilities in Cisco TelePresence TC and TE Software Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20140430-tcte Revision 1.0 For Public Release 2014 April 30 16:00 UTC (GMT) Summary === Cisco TelePresence TC and TE Software are affected

[c-nsp] C6K, 15.1(2)SY, Private VLAN Edge?

C6K, 15.1(2)SY. I am interested in running Private VLAN Edge, but this doesn't appear to be supported (only full Private VLAN, which doesn't fit what I am looking for.) Any ideas? -- Tim: ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net

[c-nsp] ME3600X - VRF + VPLS Instances

Hi, Just wanting to confirm the limits imposed on the ME3600X for vrf's and vpls - I've read that it is 128(VRF) and 26(VPLS)? Are these limits hard-set...i.e. If you attempt to create VRF # 129 it is denied? Cheers.