Re: [c-nsp] OSPFv3 in CoPP

Hi, maybe you need to add the non-link-local address. I did not separate OSPF and BGP, but this works: ipv6 access-list acl-copp-transfer-ipv6 permit 89 FE80::/10 any permit ipv6 2001:DB8::/48 any 2001:DB8::/48 contains all transfer networks and loopback adresses in my case. kind regards Rolf

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus 3048 airflow configuration

On Mar 15, 2018, at 20:48, Garrett Skjelstad wrote: > > port-side What do you call the other side? Starboard? (SCNR.) Grüße, Carsten ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus 3048 airflow configuration

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Tim Cooper wrote: > > Surely using industry terminology like ‘back-to-front’ and ‘front-to-back’ > and then changing what that means whimsically depending on to which product > it applies is stupid? Or is that just me? > It appears stupid and confusing to me as we

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus 3048 airflow configuration

I think it would most likely just be easier on equipment to label a direction of airflow on the chassis to bring visibility to this (I don't recall seeing this on Nexus). Although, come to think about it, I'm pretty sure it has direction of airflow in the hardware installation guide... I personall

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus 3048 airflow configuration

> On 15 Mar 2018, at 19:17, Ian Mock wrote: > > Yes, port side exhaust is normal for datacenter class switches. The switches > face the same side as the server ports they're plugging into for ease of > cable management, and to maintain symmetry of airflow. > > Ian Mock Yeah I get that, but

Re: [c-nsp] Nexus 3048 airflow configuration

Yes, port side exhaust is normal for datacenter class switches. The switches face the same side as the server ports they're plugging into for ease of cable management, and to maintain symmetry of airflow. Ian Mock On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 12:51 PM, Mailing Lists wrote: > Anyone else using these

Re: [c-nsp] PPPoE termination on ASR9K without SE linecards

Hi Brian, Indeed in order to terminate PPPoE on the LC you need an SE LC. The question is what happens when you want to terminate the session on the RSP. You certainly need the SE RSP but do you still need the SE LC? Thanks, George On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 7:58 PM, Brian Turnbow wrote: > Hi Ge

Re: [c-nsp] PPPoE termination on ASR9K without SE linecards

Hi George I have always been told that TR cards do not support bng that you need for pppoe on asr. Same for the old trident cards. And even if they did you would be severely limited in qos scaling. (if you need really high qos scaling you should go tomahawk btw) There are some cisco live present

[c-nsp] Nexus 3048 airflow configuration

Anyone else using these noticed that the default airflow configuration is what I would consider 'back-to-front' but the device reports it as 'front-to-back'? Is it normal for Nexus stuff to default to this configuration, and if so is it normal for the port side as the rear? Thanks ___

Re: [c-nsp] spanning-tree for local switching on ASR920

On Thu, 2018-03-15 at 13:29 +, Nick Cutting wrote: > In the output of show spanning tree - is the port with the untagged > service instance forwarding on vlan 4093? > Unless something changed from 16.6 -> 16.7 I imagine that it is only > forwarding and processing BPDU's on vlans 2 and 10. Corr

Re: [c-nsp] spanning-tree for local switching on ASR920

Thank you In the output of show spanning tree - is the port with the untagged service instance forwarding on vlan 4093? Unless something changed from 16.6 -> 16.7 I imagine that it is only forwarding and processing BPDU's on vlans 2 and 10. If a bridging loop came in on Vlan 4093, because BPDU'

Re: [c-nsp] spanning-tree for local switching on ASR920

For what it's worth I have working Rapid PVST+ on ARS 920 IOS 16.7.1 with the following configuration: spanning-tree mode rapid-pvst spanning-tree vlan 2,10,2302 priority 24576 ! interface TenGigabitEthernet0/0/25 description => Towards HP 5700FF mtu 9216 no ip address load-interval 30 servic

Re: [c-nsp] IOS-XR BGP RR MCID (Multiple Cluster ID)

On 15/Mar/18 12:18, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote: > Maybe you might start looking at some scaling techniques when you'll have a > need to transport multiple paths for a prefix for load-sharing or > primary-backup use cases, say to reduce internet convergence times form 2 > mins down to

[c-nsp] PPPoE termination on ASR9K without SE linecards

Hello all, I hope for a positive answer on this.. Has anyone tried to terminate PPPoE on ASR9K *without SE LCs*, *but with SE RSPs*? I know I can terminate PPPoE on RSP which will affect system scalability in terms of sessions, but is it mandatory to have SE LCs as well? When I asked Cisco they s

Re: [c-nsp] IOS-XR BGP RR MCID (Multiple Cluster ID)

Actually the fully-meshed RR's actually do "reflect" routes to each other. They are still breaking the iBGP to iBGP rule, they're just exercising the "client to non-client" rule in 2) when "relying" route from a local cluster to RRs in other clusters and in turn those RRs in other clusters then e