Re: [c-nsp] ASR920 - Any "outstanding" TAC cases people are working through?

On 2/Jun/16 21:41, Erik Sundberg wrote: > We have been using ASR920's for a couple months now. > > I have an outstanding Memory leak issue in > asr920-universalk9_npe.03.16.01a.S.155-3.S1a-ext.bin > > https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCuy87268 > > The work around doesn't work for

Re: [c-nsp] ip virtual-reassembly drop-fragments

--- Begin Message --- How did you determine that this was a fragment-DDos as opposed to valid-fragmentation coupled with packets arriving out-of-order? Be careful when you deny fragments because you could very well deny legitimate-traffic, unless of course your $Employer has a policy *not* to

Re: [c-nsp] ip virtual-reassembly drop-fragments

Sorry typo it was "Internet" We are getting many IP fragment DDoS so I was planning to use on outside interface to drop all IP fragmented packet. -- Sent from my iPhone > On Jun 2, 2016, at 10:44 AM, Juergen Marenda wrote: > > > Satish Patel wrote: >> is it safe to put on

Re: [c-nsp] ASR920 - Any "outstanding" TAC cases people are working through?

We have been using ASR920's for a couple months now. I have an outstanding Memory leak issue in asr920-universalk9_npe.03.16.01a.S.155-3.S1a-ext.bin https://bst.cloudapps.cisco.com/bugsearch/bug/CSCuy87268 The work around doesn't work for me, I just tried it. TAC gave me the following. We

Re: [c-nsp] 6500/7600 TCAM Usage

On 2 June 2016 at 18:32, Chris Welti wrote: >> You can configure 'freeze', 'reset', or 'recover' for exception >> action. TAC didn't know what 'recover' does and that option is not >> available on newer kit. > > > Where can you set that option for FIB exceptions? 'mls cef

Re: [c-nsp] 6509 weird pps value

On 2 June 2016 at 17:43, Ben Hammadi, Kayssar (Nokia - TN/Tunis) wrote: Hey, >On the 6708 linecard The fabric asic has 20G and these combine two > pairs: 1,4,5,7 and 2,4,6,8 Traffic between ports in these groups does not go > over the fabric and is not

Re: [c-nsp] 6500/7600 TCAM Usage

On 01/06/16 18:28, Saku Ytti wrote: On 1 June 2016 at 12:40, Phil Mayers wrote: That was always the documented behaviour on sup720. I never got an explanation when I asked as to why it was irreversible. You can configure 'freeze', 'reset', or 'recover' for exception

Re: [c-nsp] 6500/7600 TCAM Usage

On 01/06/16 16:28, Marian Ďurkovič wrote: On Wed, Jun 01, 2016 at 11:03:05AM +0200, Chris Welti wrote: On 01/06/16 10:24, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: On Tue, 31 May 2016, Pete Templin wrote: +1 on what Gert said. You'll get log entries at the 90% threshold within a region, but the badness only

Re: [c-nsp] ISR4431 memory usage

Have several ISR4431 with minimum two full tables (but no default), without problems, migrated from 7201 and [23]8xx'er (but memory-eater "soft-reconfiguration" is no longer in use) Juergen. ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net

Re: [c-nsp] ip virtual-reassembly drop-fragments

Satish Patel wrote: > is it safe to put on internap facing interface? > > ip virtual-reassembly drop-fragments what's an "internap"? s/ap/et/ Yes it is safe, but "no ip virtual-reassembly" is the best thing you can do, on every interface, and look form time to time and after reloads weather

Re: [c-nsp] 6509 weird pps value

Hi Saku, On the 6708 linecard The fabric asic has 20G and these combine two pairs: 1,4,5,7 and 2,4,6,8 Traffic between ports in these groups does not go over the fabric and is not counted against that BW, what about traffic between groups exemple from port 1 to port 2 in same linecard

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9k Bundle QoS in 6.0.1

On 2 June 2016 at 15:55, Adam Vitkovsky wrote: Hey, > Arguably there are some benefits in using central arbiter but I'm not really > convinced. I don't believe this how ASR9k works. Considering I have no idea how it works, it's pretty bold statement. I'm fit for

Re: [c-nsp] ip virtual-reassembly drop-fragments

Satish Patel wrote: > is it safe to put on internap facing interface? > > ip virtual-reassembly drop-fragments what's an "internap"? Nick ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive

Re: [c-nsp] ASR9k Bundle QoS in 6.0.1

> Saku Ytti [mailto:s...@ytti.fi] > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2016 12:50 PM > > On 1 June 2016 at 12:45, Adam Vitkovsky > wrote: > > Got a confirmation from Xander, so in summary: > > Each RP has 2 fabric chips, but both controlled by one common RSP Arbiter. > > There

Re: [c-nsp] 6509 weird pps value

On 2 June 2016 at 11:41, Ben Hammadi, Kayssar (Nokia - TN/Tunis) wrote: > The amount of Traffic that cross the fabric can be seen via " show > fabric utilization " , what about the local switched traffic inside the same > channel , how we can check the

Re: [c-nsp] 6509 weird pps value

Thanks , The amount of Traffic that cross the fabric can be seen via " show fabric utilization " , what about the local switched traffic inside the same channel , how we can check the amount ? Br. KAYSSAR BEN HAMMADI IP Technical Manager CCIE (#48406), JNCIE-M (#471), JNCIE-SP

Re: [c-nsp] 6509 weird pps value

On 2 June 2016 at 11:24, Ben Hammadi, Kayssar (Nokia - TN/Tunis) wrote: Hey, > In case of DFC equipped module and the traffic is between two ports in > same pair ( in same FPGA) , is this traffic seen on the " show fabric > utilization " ? , if no do you

Re: [c-nsp] 6509 weird pps value

Thanks Saku, In case of DFC equipped module and the traffic is between two ports in same pair ( in same FPGA) , is this traffic seen on the " show fabric utilization " ? , if no do you have an idea how we can check the load of the FPGA ? Br. KAYSSAR BEN HAMMADI IP Technical Manager