Re: [c-nsp] OSPF LSA Type 3 / 5 question ...

--- Begin Message --- Bryan, .. is there a clever way for the ABR to detect that the Type 5 LSA is within the range it's already summarizing (Type 3) and suppress its upstream announcement? The above would break-the-back of OSPF as we know it. What you are trying to do cannot be accomplished.

Re: [c-nsp] NCS-5501 & 5502 Experiences?

Ahhh I see. Yepp, were using em as LSRs so no real public access vector into it so we didn’t deepdive and trim that much just added some standardized configuration on it. Good to know to be cautious with that setting though thanks  //Gustav -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: Saku Ytti

Re: [c-nsp] NCS-5501 & 5502 Experiences?

On 4 February 2017 at 02:01, Gustav Ulander wrote: Hey, > We are able to enter the configuration and were also able to show lpts and se > counters go up. It would be interesting to know how far you got? As far as unable to keep good BGP up, when unconfigured

Re: [c-nsp] NCS-5501 & 5502 Experiences?

Hello Saku. Interesting, granted we haven’t played around that much with it and its abit troubling if it actually dosent work. Where you able to enter the configuration when you were evaluating it? We are running 6.1.2. We are able to enter the configuration and were also able to show lpts and

Re: [c-nsp] NCS-5501 & 5502 Experiences?

On 3 February 2017 at 17:36, Gustav Ulander wrote: > As far as we have been able to verify the copp policy seems to be working in > the same manner. This does not match our testing nor information we've received from Cisco. To my best of knowledge platform

[c-nsp] G.8032 Interop between IOS-XR Calix E7

Hey everyone Curious if anyone can clarify G.8032 behavior on ASR9K IOS-XR or even IOS-XE on an ASR920. Trying to turn up G.8032 with a few Calix E7 shelves in the mix. The Calix E7s confirm strictly to the standard. The destination MAC for R-APS messages are sent to and expected to be

Re: [c-nsp] NCS-5501 & 5502 Experiences?

Hello We are actually using the 5001 not the 5501. This means we are having 40x10Gbit and 4x100Gbit which is the same as stated throughput. However we are pretty far from those traffic levels so we don't see that as a major issue at the moment anyway. As far as we have been able to verify the

Re: [c-nsp] Understanding A9K Power Status

Hey Ted, > On Feb 2, 2017, at 2:44 PM, Ted Johansson wrote: > > 1) I'm not seeing the same issue as you do, sorry. What version of 5.3 are > you running, SP and SMUs? (hope you are running 5.3.4) Yup, 5.3.4 + SMUs: RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:#show install active summary Fri Feb

Re: [c-nsp] NCS-5501 & 5502 Experiences?

Hi Gustav, How bad NCS5501 not SE variant is oversubscribed ? From the data sheet "up to 800 Gbps of system throughput" fall short of the total 48x10 + 6x100. Does NCS5501 has a LPTS/CoPP implementation similar with ASR9k ? Many thanks in advance ! On 02/02/2017 10:56 AM, Gustav Ulander

Re: [c-nsp] MPLS service provider monitoring tools

Hi, I’ve been a big fan of Observium for a number of years, but recently I’ve been looking to switch to LibreNMS as they tend to be a little faster at building support for new equipment. You might find either one would fit your needs. The pay features in Observium are included in LibreNMS