On Mon, 8 May 2017, Mohammad Khalil wrote:
Hi all
I have upgraded my router from 5.3.4 to 6.1.2 , and I have stuck at
Processor family/kernel mismatch (2/4)
Crash[0,0] at init_cpu line 220
Becuase I have discovered that RSP-8G is not supported on the 6.1.x train
I have 5.3.4 mini already ,
Hi all
I have upgraded my router from 5.3.4 to 6.1.2 , and I have stuck at
Processor family/kernel mismatch (2/4)
Crash[0,0] at init_cpu line 220
Becuase I have discovered that RSP-8G is not supported on the 6.1.x train
I have 5.3.4 mini already , I just want to roll back to it
Any help?
Thx for the hint, indeed "sh controllers gigabitEthernet 0/0" prints it.
No mention of MAC .. in the output, but packets with all-zero
DMAC are apparently counted both under .. hits as well as under
Software filtered frames.
In reality they pass through to L3 processing.
On 8 May 2017 at 10:50, James Bensley wrote:
> Wondering why the router is forwarding the frame/packet
> is at Cisco's digression
* discretion
James.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-n
On 8 May 2017 at 10:25, rako wrote:
> The question is really why destination MAC .. passes behind
> PHY/mac_filter on this platform and whether such behavior should be
> generally considered wrong.
> It's not the case on other Cisco platforms.
I would probably consider it "wrong" beca
On 8 May 2017 at 09:57, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I'm not sure why this is relevant?
In my head I have just skipped forward a bit, the behaviour is
undefined and probably defaults to accepting it as a broadcast. It’s
very unlikely to be a XEROX OUI destined packet. Up until the point of
my post
On 8 May 2017 at 12:25, rako wrote:
> The question is really why destination MAC .. passes behind
> PHY/mac_filter on this platform and whether such behavior should be
> generally considered wrong.
You can view the contents of the MAC filter, I don't have any classic
IOS CPEs, so I ca
Interface config is very simple:
interface GigabitEthernet0/0
ip address ..
ipv6 address .
no ip proxy-arp
no mop enabled
duplex auto
speed auto
The question is really why destination MAC .. passes behind
PHY/mac_filter on this platform and whether such behavior should b
Hey,
I'm not sure why this is relevant?
OP is asking if frame should have passed PHY/mac_filter, If L3 port
receives frame, it does not care about L2 headers, it'll just forward
it based on L3, and generates new L2 rewrite on egress.
Now should the router have received it or not is debatable.
Te
Can you make a packet capture of the packet coming into the ingress
interface and going out of the egress interface and share the capture
with us? Then we can look for any differences in the packet (how the
router may have changed it's contents). Also share the ingress and
egress interface configs?
10 matches
Mail list logo
