Can anyone confirm if the ASR920 platform can be used in a MPLS P role?
They are working fine for us as small PE but we are having some very odd
RSVP issues in the lab with transit LSP.
Ian
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://pu
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 04:49:58PM +, Ian Goodall wrote:
> Can anyone confirm if the ASR920 platform can be used in a MPLS P role?
> They are working fine for us as small PE but we are having some very odd
> RSVP issues in the lab with transit LSP.
We've done a bit of testing as P with LD
On 23/Jan/18 18:49, Ian Goodall wrote:
> Can anyone confirm if the ASR920 platform can be used in a MPLS P role?
> They are working fine for us as small PE but we are having some very odd
> RSVP issues in the lab with transit LSP.
What are these odd issues?
Mark.
__
Hi all
We have a mixture of BNGs, ASR9k and ASR1k that use Freeradius for AAA.
One of the differences between the models is the format for the unnumbered
loopback attribute that comes from Freeradius
For the ASR9k format is "ip:ipv4-unnumbered=Loopback2000"
For the ASR1k format is "ip:ip-unnum
After further investigation and debug it looks like we have hit bug
CSCuy29638 in a Juniper environment.
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 8:01 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>
> On 23/Jan/18 18:49, Ian Goodall wrote:
>
> Can anyone confirm if the ASR920 platform can be used in a MPLS P role?
> They are working
I've not experienced any issues using them as P, but that is in a pure
cisco environment. Interop can always be a pain.
PC
Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 11:38:34PM +, Ian Goodall wrote:
> After further investigation and debug it looks like we have hit bug
> CSCuy29638 in a Juniper environment.
>
>
No issues as of now since I am using RSVP TE with explicit-path. And, the
signaling seems ok all the times.
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 5:30 AM, Patrick Cole wrote:
> I've not experienced any issues using them as P, but that is in a pure
> cisco environment. Interop can always be a pain.
>
> PC
>
>
asr920 usefull mpls but small route table.
On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 11:55 AM, Hari Sapkota
wrote:
> No issues as of now since I am using RSVP TE with explicit-path. And, the
> signaling seems ok all the times.
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 5:30 AM, Patrick Cole wrote:
>
> > I've not experienced an
On 24/Jan/18 01:38, Ian Goodall wrote:
> After further investigation and debug it looks like we have hit
> bugCSCuy29638 in a Juniper environment.
Ah, yes - that's a nasty bug.
First hit it in 2016. Thankfully, Cisco stepped up and sent us some
Engineering code to test a fix within a week of f
We have a Nexus 3548 connected to Ethernet transport connected to a Mikrotik
CCR on the far end. The CCR's configuration is fairly straight forward, but so
is the Nexus. We have a native VLAN (200) and a tagged VLAN (778). We're not
seeing each other over 778.
Thoughts?
Nexus# show run int
Transport provider admitted to having a VLAN filter in place. They're working
to fix that.
-
Mike Hammett
Intelligent Computing Solutions
Midwest Internet Exchange
The Brothers WISP
- Original Message -
From: "Mike Hammett"
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Wednesday
11 matches
Mail list logo