On 15/04/2015 13:02, M K wrote:
The output tells me I have the ability , and I compared it to another
module and the same appeared
2 48 48 port 10/100 mb RJ45 WS-X6348-RJ-45
SAL06313RHP
http://goo.gl/I2GlGA
First hit, page 3.
Nick
Yea thats our thought also no niggles just plain sailing :)
Gustav UHLANDER
Senior Communication Infrastructure Engineer
Sopra Steria
Kungsbron 13
Box 169
SE-101 23 Stockholm - Sweden
Phone: +46 8 622 42 00 - Mobile: +46 70 962 71 03
gustav.ulan...@soprasteria.com www.soprasteria.se
The content
On 15/04/2015 01:58, Bill Woodcock wrote:
Yes, entirely, as of about two years ago. Very happy with them.
Hi Bill,
What L3 features do you use on them? Last time I looked, I got the
impression that L3 on the smaller Nexus devices (i.e. non-7K) was a bit
patchy...
Thanks,
Howie
Trying to set up the XML API on an ASR 9K and find myself unable to
authenticate with the XML API using Netcat.
I've configured the box as below:
Building configuration...
!! IOS XR Configuration 5.1.2
!! Last configuration change at Wed Apr 15 07:19:42 2015 by root
!
username xml
group sysadmin
Got caught up playing with the wrong tools - was using telnet initially -
not sure why I switched to netcat - not enough caffeine.
Thanks!
alexanderturner@Alexanders-MacBook-Pro~/Downloads telnet 10.2.100.1 38751
Trying 10.2.100.1...
Connected to 10.2.100.1.
Escape character is '^]'.
User
A link to the article/web page would be helpful because the current first hit
on page three really doesn't relate to the issue.
Remember the order can change based on someone's search history as well as
the number of people visiting a link
And additional links being added.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Cisco Security Advisory: Cisco Secure Desktop Cache Cleaner Command Execution
Vulnerability
Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20150415-csd
Revision 1.0
For Public Release 2015 April 15 16:00 UTC (GMT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Cisco IOS XR Software BVI Routed Packet Denial of Service Vulnerability
Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20150415-iosxr
Revision 1.0
For Public Release 2015 April 15 16:00 UTC (GMT)
Summary
===
A vulnerability in the packet-processing code of Cisco IOS
A link to the article/web page would be helpful because the current first hit
on page three really doesn't relate to the issue.
Remember the order can change based on someone's search history as well as the
number of people visiting a link
And additional links being added.
Mack McBride |
On 15/04/2015 07:42, Mark Tinka wrote:
On 14/Apr/15 18:27, Nick Hilliard wrote:
What platform though? This problem is massively platform specific and the
ability to implement PE entropy labels or do deep packet lookups for
lag/ecmp load balancing will depend entirely on the chipset
Hello everyone,
I am looking to purchase a cisco ASR1006. My needs is less than 10Gbps of
traffic, but I need about 5 10GigE ports. Don't want to LAG 1GigE ports,
b/c of cross connect costs. So I am considering either the ESP10 or ESP20.
Will the ASR1000-6TGE work fine with ESP10 or 20? Or do I
right, both trio and asr9k can do lag/ecmp balancing based on payload
inspection to some degree, but it's complicated and hacky.
getting offtopic, but wondering what you mean with complicated and
hacky about the load balancing algo on Trio?
Trio hash includes;
- upto 5 labels
- ipv4/v6 payload
On 15/04/2015 21:50, Daniel Verlouw wrote:
getting offtopic, but wondering what you mean with complicated and
hacky about the load balancing algo on Trio?
Trio hash includes;
- upto 5 labels
- ipv4/v6 payload contents (and yes, it checks the packet' length to
avoid the 4 or 6 DMAC issue)
-
I am looking to purchase a cisco ASR1006. My needs is less than 10Gbps of
traffic, but I need about 5 10GigE ports. Don't want to LAG 1GigE ports,
b/c of cross connect costs. So I am considering either the ESP10 or ESP20.
Will the ASR1000-6TGE work fine with ESP10 or 20? Or do I need a
On 15/04/2015 21:54, Nick Hilliard wrote:
basically, this. It's not exactly obvious, and the 4/6 nibble srcmac
problem+workaround is a hack.
erm, dstmac.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Thanks Gustav - Notice there is a difference in buffer size (4948 v Nexus), but
store and forward vs cut-though may make the buffer difference moot?
Any issues with micro bursts causing drops on the Nexus? (As we see virtually
none on the 4948's)
Cheers.
From:
On 15 Apr 2015, at 9:08 am, CiscoNSP List cisconsp_l...@hotmail.com wrote:
Nexus 3000's ? (Option to do VPC with multiple 3000's in one rack back to
core/agg switches?)
Just installed two 3048’s to replace a Cat65k/Sup2. Configured vPC with LACP
towards switches, ESX, Filers and Windows
Hello.
Yea we are aware of that but we were pleasantly surprised with no buffer drops
actually.
We are having a bunch of old ESX servers on these also with lots of north/south
traffic so it doesn't seem to be that big of an issue at least not for us with
our traffic profiles.
/Gustav
From:
Hello.
Yes we are using Nexus 3048 for TOR when 10 Ge isn't necessary so that is the
direct replacement for our 4948E TOR switches.
We are generally very pleased with them both price, feature and performance
wise.
However these are getting rather old now so we are woundering if they are being
HiThe output tells me I have the ability , and I compared it to another module
and the same appeared
2 48 48 port 10/100 mb RJ45 WS-X6348-RJ-45 SAL06313RHP
3 48 CEF720 48 port 10/100/1000mb Ethernet WS-X6748-GE-TX SAL1435S15F
FastEthernet2/2 Model:
20 matches
Mail list logo
