> Just remember
> that you cannot summarize (today) your main Loopback used for your
> LDP/BGP ID as there needs to be a full LSP from ingress-to-egress PE
> across areas, if you providing L2/L3VPN services.
Is this because the lsp is label in label (outer being pe, inner being
customer route)?
__
> According to Cisco, an OSPF area should have no more than 50
> nodes in order to minimize the database.
Its a pretty rough figure. Basically the larger the ospf database, the
longer it takes to do dijkstra. It's not a hugely complicated
algorithm and most cpu's can handle fairly large calculation
Hi Mario
> I have the problem that the CPU on my router is going mad when my link to an
> IX gets up again after an interface flap, the router reestablishes all
> sessions in the same time and then kinda gets in a loop because he begins to
> drop BGP packets after being so busy processing BGP upda
Just ping 'the internet'... :)
On 20 October 2010 02:35, Jay Nakamura wrote:
> When you use IP SLA to track if an upstream is working on a ISP
> connection (From customer point of view, and you are not the ISP that
> knows what will be safe to ping), what do you usually configure to
> ping? I h
> Why ospf takes so long to load when labbing on dynamips?
It might seem simple, but if you have not properly selected an idlepc
setting your cpu will be chewed & this causes nightmares for anything
timer related.
When the boxes are sitting there doing "nothing", what is your host
cpu looking lik
Unless of course the NAT is happening on a different router than the
router terminating the sessions...
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/ci
If you are terminating PPTP/L2TP sessions then you may be able to find
a device that will do deep inspection on the sessions themselves,
apart from that it would be a real challenge..
On 12 October 2010 20:08, Mohammad Khalil wrote:
> hi all
> I have setup dial in vpn on cisco router
> All the us
> After this the endpoint sends an gratuitous arp on the requested address, and
> then an other answers that it has the ip address.
How are you seeing this behaviour - packet capture or does the
endpoint report it?
> I've pulled out the arp table before enabling a new endpoint to get the ip
> ad
> i need CE1 to see the routes of CE2 without 64550 in as-path
Are you using a VRF? Could you please post the output of 'show ip bgp' from CE1?
Is there a reason you are using local-as 64550 on PE1?
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
ht
> If the customer is provisioned inside a VRF you could use the AS-override
> feature to rewrite each AS Hop in the path to the configured BGP neighbor ASN.
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_3/switch/command/reference/swi_n1.html#wp1034057
Yep, looks like you should use either of these, de
> sorry i didn't make it clear
> but i was using local-as between them and i want PE router to appear to CE
> as it belongs to different AS (with private ASN) but the updates from PE to
> CE contains real ASN number only not the private one
> plz ignore the previous description
There are 2 places
Ibrahim, a link for you:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080093f29.shtml
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.
> I was labbing some bgp features and i have PE-CE and there is eBGP peering
> between them using private-asn on CE
> any ideas why that don't work ?
Hi Ibrahim - It would violate BGP specification to send a NLRI without
your own AS number in it, to another AS.
Did you change the path when it got
> OSPFv3 (and, I'd assume, EIGRP for IPv6) communicate via link-local
> addresses. So if you don't have them, these IGPs will fail...
ok - cheers :)
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> Sure it will. But it's not permitted to use that as a source address
> for anything that's not link-local.
Ok, cool.
I've done some reading and this is my take on it..
Is it that link-local addresses are used for ND & some routing
protocols use ND mechanisms to check adjacencies? Apart from th
> OTOH, forcing "ipv6 unnumbered lo0" will just work - or you could use
> /124s or just /64.
Hey Gert. I would have thought that the router assigned a link local
address in addition to the user-configured addressing?
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp
> my network topology is a main ring and some sub rings connected to the main
> one and some sites are star connected
> anyway if i am offering some basic Internet connectivity such as WiMAX
> service and Leased Line what is best for me , to make L2 or L3 ??
> and i used L3 and enabled OSPF , is
Hi all,
Is there an easy way to see which iBGP routes are not being selected
due to next-hop not being in IGP?
Before and after IGP route added shown below, note both are marked as valid..
-- BEFORE IGP--
AS5000_LA#show ip bgp
BGP table version is 5, local router ID is 10.0.0.5
Status codes: s su
> Hi All,
>
> I'm looking to get a few recommendations for a Cisco router that will serve
> as an edge IR for a Internet connection starting at 100Mbps...and could
> scale to 200Mbps within the next 3years.
Do you work in pre-sales, Someone Else?
___
cis
Is the link at the remote side of the IPsec tunnel saturated?
> but when i ping using Ipsec tunnel :
> C2821#ping vrf VPN003 10.11.12.254 size 600 repeat 150
> Type escape sequence to abort.
> Sending 150, 600-byte ICMP Echos to 10.11.12.254, timeout is 2 seconds:
> .!!....
What feature of this are you using? (what are you clicking on when you
go to the site?) ;)
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Congrats - glad you've found a solution!!
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> I have used internet looking glasses and routeviews but I am actually
> looking for an equivalent of “sh ip ASN” (instead of “sh ip route”) where a
> certain ASN number’s presence on the internet can be deduced and then
> displayed on a geographical map (google maps).
>
> I think that GeoIP might
> One vendor I need to connect to, I need to advertise a specific /24
> (10.200.16.0/24) to the eBGP neighbor. OF course BGP won't advertise the
> route to the eBGP neighbor because the /24 isn't in IGP, only the /16
> summary.
I don't think your going to have much luck. What you are asking, it to
> Speed, the customer said that slow and a lot of disconnect on application.
> Do you know if my MTU is correct ? (mss fix and other) ?
The easiest way to check for MTU is to ping the other end,
dont-fragment and mess about with the packet size. Because there are
so many different things going on
Could be a bunch of things - has it always happened, or only just started.
- Fibre
- RX strength too high
- RX strength too low
What issues are you seeing on the other end?
On 22 September 2010 22:43, Good One wrote:
>
>
>
> I have a 10G circuit over DWDM which is flapping very frequently
> oc
> i request your help because we have a problems of speed between two
> site.
What is the problem, exactly?
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/piperma
> Probably a silly question, but can anyone explain to me this:
> 3561 3356 9031 {35821,35821,35821,35821} i
To explain it a bit better, I'm looking at real routing information
from routeviews (#3).
According to RFC 4271 (9.2.2.2 Aggregating Routing Information):
> For the purpose of aggregating
Hi all,
Probably a silly question, but can anyone explain to me this: 3561
3356 9031 {35821,35821,35821,35821} i
This one makes sense because 24863 is doing aggregation, and all the
AS's are different: 10026 3356 24863 {6127,45246} i
Cheers
Heath
___
c
Actually, Its a pretty good read!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1269288/STEPHEN-HAWKING-How-build-time-machine.html
> Go to Google, type in "how to build a time machine", read.
>
> gert
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.
+1 :)
> Go to Google, type in "how to build a time machine", read.
>
> gert
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Is BGP information passed in to this 6500 (that connects to VXR), or
are you just using a default route?
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/c
> I put a static route at our Internet edge - we redistribute static into OSPF
> so now this /32 destination is able to be seen in the routing table (other
> than the default originated route).
That really does suggest that the routing information is incorrect. I
mentioned previously about routing
> As I understand the problem, your interpretaion is correct. Only the
> worst case de-aggregation of /16 into 256 /24s would cause every
> even/odd /24 to find a new next-hop. Most cases would be somewhere
> between x0 (same next-hop) through x8 (your example) and up to x256
> (worst case).
Yes i
What happens when you try BADIP+1 or something close to it?
Also if you happened to have assigned this BADIP to a dsl customer (or
in a routed network via radius attribute behind it), and had the
config on the lns cause the next hop to be the 6500 (policy routing,
vrf etc)..
I noticed the cef vers
Hi Gert & All,
Just a quick one.. I've been working on getting this modelled up by
using mrt dumps from routeviews.
I'm processing the tables to try and find out which AS has the most
omni-directional routing information. I mean, trying to figure out who
would get hammered the most if they were do
If the problem was portfast (which is a very good suggestion as it
causes problems with a whole bunch of things when listening at the
start), the following would not work..
> And from the switch side - no errors or flaps. And the trouble is the
> clients in question don't ever fully complete the
So far, it's got me stumped! Put some port mirroring and capture from
that 6500 perhaps..
My mind is hovering somewhere around ttl / forward path being ok, but
return broken for some reason.. but I don't think it will have any
success.
Its worth checking (as Brian said) 'show ip cef exact-route' (i
Just a random thought.. have you got any ipsec tunnels going? I just
checked and they don't appear in cef output (cryptomap on ingress).
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at ht
> dis2-rtr-mb#show ip route xx.xxx.2.226
> % Network not in table
> dis2-rtr-mb#show ip cef xx.xxx.2.226
> 0.0.0.0/0, version 8684984, epoch 1, cached adjacency xx.xxx.0.226
> 0 packets, 0 bytes
> via xx.xxx.0.226, Vlan4, 0 dependencies
>next hop xx.xxx.0.226, Vlan4
>valid cached adjacency
x27;t ever fully complete the DHCP transaction upon power
> up to assign an ip - so they can't connect -but if I assign an IP manually on
> the client - then they can connect right up to Citrix servers.
>
> That's why I figured get a packet capture to look at.
>
> Th
gt;
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> -Jeff
>
>
>
> From: Heath Jones [mailto:hj1...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 10:28 AM
>
>
>
> It's a L2 & L3 broadcast for requests, then unicast for replies. The clients
> will never have IP addresses bef
chable was going something “funky” I should still see a full traceroute
> at least across the igp correct?
>
> With that in mind, I’m puzzled … maybe it’s simply a matter of “sit back and
> take a good long look” as Gert just suggested ;)
>
>
>
> Thanks folks …
>
>
>
10 16:23, Heath Jones wrote:
> If my understanding is correct here, then the DSL user is probably
> blocking inbound icmp so you would expect the traceroutes you see.. (just
> constant timeouts).
> Lets take a step back here... What problem is the customer reporting?
>
>
>
>
so
> before the client has an ip from dhcp - isn't the dhcp transaction all arp?)
>
>
> Sent from Midland Paper Company's Blackberry Server
>
> *From*: Heath Jones [mailto:hj1...@gmail.com]
> *Sent*: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 10:12 AM
> *To*: Jeff Wojciechowsk
hat
> nature that the traceroute would at least transverse our igp properly …
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Heath Jones [mailto:hj1...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 21, 2010 11:00 AM
>
> *To:* Paul Stewart
> *Cc:
I just re-read and saw it was the 2601 as the dhcp server.
What problem are you trying to solve?
On 21 September 2010 16:10, Heath Jones wrote:
> Hi Jeff - which device is performing the dhcp server function and what
> problem are you actually having?
>
>
>
> On 21 Septembe
Hi Jeff - which device is performing the dhcp server function and what
problem are you actually having?
On 21 September 2010 15:46, Jeff Wojciechowski <
jeff.wojciechow...@midlandpaper.com> wrote:
> All:
>
> I would like to use Embedded Packet Capture at a remote site to
> troubleshoot IOS DHCP
thing in there to
> limit ICMP at all….;)
>
>
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Heath Jones [mailto:hj1...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 21, 2010 10:05 AM
> *To:* Paul Stewart
> *Cc:* cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [c-nsp] Weird Traceroute Is
Hi Paul - perhaps you have a firewall filter preventing the ingress icmp
replies (to the 7206VXR)..?
On 21 September 2010 14:54, Paul Stewart wrote:
> Hi folks..
>
>
>
> We have a customer who is connected over DSL who is having issues getting
> to
> a certain remote site more often than not.
You can use public tools to view bgp routing information from different
viewpoints on the internet. A good starting point is to check out
routeviews.org, jump on a box and 'show ip route' for a prefix you know the
enterprise is advertising. That will show you a bunch of paths that are
known to get
Sounds like your right though from reading through that thread. I'll keep it
in mind for future reference - 'always check qos'!
On 18 September 2010 13:25, Adrian Minta wrote:
> On 09/18/10 15:17, Heath Jones wrote:
>
>> Just a silly question, but if that was th
Just a silly question, but if that was the case wouldn't the guy see drops
on the interface stats?
On 18 September 2010 12:57, Adrian Minta wrote:
> http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/cisco/nsp/80758
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
>
>
>
> ___
> cisco-nsp
Hi
Firstly, when you say packet loss, what are you referring to? Is it just the
icmp traffic, or are customers reporting faults with non icmp traffic or...?
Is the 'internet gateway' the 7609 pictured on the diagram?
Its pretty unlikely, but worth checking that there are no duplicate mac
addresse
John's probably right, but if that does actually work, perhaps it is because
you have not configured your end to match the ip they are using for their
update source?
Seeing the configs would help a lot..
On 16 September 2010 19:53, John Neiberger wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Chri
Awesome!
On 16 September 2010 17:09, David Freedman wrote:
> Heath Jones wrote:
> > Yes, you need to assign from radius, but have the vrf's existing on the
> > cisco (it must know to map vrf 10 to vlan 10 on the interface to the core
> > router).
> >
> >
Yes, you need to assign from radius, but have the vrf's existing on the
cisco (it must know to map vrf 10 to vlan 10 on the interface to the core
router).
The cisco documentation is here, there are some examples down the bottom.
http://www.ciscosystems.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2t/12_2t13/feature/guid
g the FIB differently.
Thanks again
On 16 September 2010 03:21, Shane Amante wrote:
> Heath, All,
>
> On Sep 15, 2010, at 12:13 MDT, Heath Jones wrote:
> > I completely agree with the problem of tcam overflow if an aggregated
> prefix
> > dissapears! I did overlook that t
Hi
Just quickly looking at it, you want to also show a different ip on the next
hop router (#2):
1. x.x.x.2 < - 7204
2. x.x.x.1 < - core router
3. n.n.n.n < - my upstream
In order to do that, you will probably have to:
- set link 7204 <-> core to be trunk, with 2 different vlans (1 for group1,
2 f
Just wondering.. Does IBLM access some generic(ish) webservice back to base
(cisco) for updates to the EoL/S etc? What if the address of that could make
its way around...
2010/9/15 Łukasz Bromirski
> On 2010-09-16 00:38, Alan Buxey wrote:
>
> also, to charge for this? hello? theres plenty of f
this stuff..
Please do let me know your thoughts either on here or directly!
Cheers
Heath
On 15 September 2010 18:43, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 06:38:26PM +0100, Heath Jones wrote:
> > I thought you'd say that...
> >
> > There is abs
r sure!
On 15 September 2010 19:33, Peter Rathlev wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 19:23 +0100, Heath Jones wrote:
> > Carrier grade equipment means nothing more than heavy metal boxes
> > containing fast interfaces,
> [...]
>
> I didn't reveal what I imply by "
ar some technical reasons why this cannot / is not / will not
be done. I think its a good idea, clearly a number of people have had it.
On 15 September 2010 19:00, Peter Rathlev wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 18:38 +0100, Heath Jones wrote:
> > There is absolutely *NO* reason why an ad
realistically be done at each AS. I'd imagine its similar to the info you
got about 1/2ish of the prefixes out there being deaggregates..?
On 15 September 2010 18:43, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 06:38:26PM +0100, Heath Jones wrote:
> > I th
18:28, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 05:55:24PM +0100, Heath Jones wrote:
> > You will probably find that the as path prepending will chew more memory
> > than 1 more prefix matching an existing as path so the subnetting option
> > works out b
Yeah it would work - 2 tunnels and routing done on your side.. Problem is
increased latency, jitter and lack of QOS, but for data traffic / backup /
something else that needs redundancy it should be ok. You could provide
managed firewalls etc etc for them - it's a product if thats what your
asking.
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 03:38:17PM +0100, Heath Jones wrote:
> > Also, I can see from global bgp they are not peering with eachother so
> its
> > not a situation where communities could help.
>
> If 36997 would offer a "make it worse than peerin
Jon there seems to be a bit of a common belief that advertising a /24 or
some prefix that has been assigned by a provider, out to another provider,
is bad practise. I don't get it either and haven't seen issues myself.
The only scenario I can think of is (in some odd configurations) when the
origi
Nick,
As soon as you redistribute from another protocol (connected, static
included) into OSPF, that router then acts as an ASBR. According to both
routers, that area will contain an ASBR and can therefore not be a stub.
Cheers
On 15 September 2010 11:32, Nick Ryce wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> Im
Nick,
As soon as you redistribute from another protocol (connected, static
included) into OSPF, that router then acts as an ASBR. According to both
routers, that area will contain an ASBR and can therefore not be a stub.
Cheers
On 15 September 2010 11:32, Nick Ryce wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> Im
You could probably get away with a second provider if you implement NAT and
don't really need to provide services to the outside world from that
location. For example if it was an office connection and you really just
needed internet access with some redundancy.
If things are more complicated than
Richard,
Is the arrangement that 36997 will provide a backup service for you, so its
a last resort to pull traffic through them? If that is the case, have you
tried prepending your advertisments towards 36997?
Also, I can see from global bgp they are not peering with eachother so its
not a situatio
Hi - I've just done some googling and found a couple of things:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_private_network
http://www.marketclarity.com.au/freebies/DemystifyingLayer2andLayer3VPNs.pdf
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/24781
Is there something more specific you wanted to know?
> were to classify and mark and leverage the queuing provided by the mpls
> provider, UDP based congestions wouldn't be a problem and voip would be
> protected, even if the bandwidth for several sites connected to the mpls
> cloud is different right ?
>
> Cheers
>
> --
ks were mpls links and i was trying to prioritize voip traffic from
> another site. Do you guys have positive experiences with this method ?
>
>
>
> --- On *Sat, 9/11/10, Brian Landers * wrote:
>
>
> From: Brian Landers
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] QoS on ingress
> To:
> circuit. I've seen one PC use more than that (yes with legitimate
> services).
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Heath Jones wrote:
>
>> If it cannot be applied as an ingress policy for inbound traffic, then on
>> the egress port of the same router fo
d in the
> egress queues of the last hop provider router. I would
> suggest separating the internet traffic onto a different circuit. A T1 seem
> a bit limited anyway. If your site is truly that small you may get more
> value out of a service like FIOS or business DSL.
>
>
>
ffic is UDP, it may
> not do any good.
>
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Heath Jones wrote:
> > Jay I know it might sound ridiculously obvious, but is another T1 out of
> the
> > question?
> >
> > On 10 September 2010 19:44, Jay Nakamura wrote:
> >>
&
Jay I know it might sound ridiculously obvious, but is another T1 out of the
question?
On 10 September 2010 19:44, Jay Nakamura wrote:
> I can't seem to figure out what to do with my situation, wondering if
> anyone had encountered this.
>
> Situation :
> Router : 1841 IOS 12.4T or 15.0M
> Inter
e switch interfaces associated with each ASIC I can redistribute the
> connections on the switch to better balance the load.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> --Vincent
>
>
>
> *From:* Heath Jones [mailto:hj1...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, September 10, 2010 11:20 AM
>
&
Hi Jay
Essentially you would try to slow down the traffic heading out of your
network that forms part of 2 way communication that waits for
acknowledgements / higher level protocol return traffic.
As an example, by slowing down TCP ACK's heading out, you will affect the
traffic heading back in the
Hi Vincent
1) Obtain screwdriver
2) Remove case
3) Trace tracks... :)
On a serious note, it is actually probably the best way to do it. What are
you trying to achieve/solve/learn?
Heath
On 10 September 2010 15:13, Vincent Aniello <
vincent.anie...@pipelinefinancial.com> wrote:
> I am trying to
I noticed that too Jon, I think its just a display thing - because it's
saying the interface name it also shows the mac..
On 9 September 2010 18:34, Jon Lewis wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Sep 2010, Drew Weaver wrote:
>
> [r...@vmz bin]# tracert x.x.x.13
>> traceroute to x.x.x.13 (x.x.x.13), 30 hops max
Actually, it could also be an ingress filter on their side (no other packets
will be routed across 10g link except the icmp request when doing locally).
On 9 September 2010 18:32, Heath Jones wrote:
> I think the problem is an egress filter on level3 side of 10g. It has to
> be..
&g
I think the problem is an egress filter on level3 side of 10g. It has to
be..
When pinging from 10g interface local .14<->remote .13, icmp response
packets will certainly come back over 10g as router on level3 side will be
using connected route. *not working*
When pinging from host to remote .13,
Have they correctly set their end of the link - does the IP address actually
match what you think it should be?
What does ARP say!!? ARP is the most underutilised tool for stuff like this!
I can see a scenario where downstream hosts could ping that IP, if they are
taking a different path and the I
I'm by no means recommending it, but you could get around the issue by using
something like CE <-> vPE BGP peering..?
Its a hack, but i'm sure you could make it go. Failover times would be
longer, states might get screwed up, just an idea...
On 8 September 2010 08:13, Sascha Pollok wrote:
> O
Just a quick thought - if some other process is chewing the cpu to the point
where it stops normal stp behaviour, might that be causing the loop?
In other words, perhaps loops are the effect, not the cause?
On 2 September 2010 07:04, Jens S Andersen wrote:
> Hi Peter
>
> The router is doing la
How about users appending the token digits to the password? Of course this
would mean your storing plain text passwords on the tacacs server
somewhere..
On 25 August 2010 21:06, Mark Tech wrote:
> Hi
> I am looking for a 2FA solution in order to connect to Cisco devices. I
> would
> like to us
Hi,
I have never seen anything about 'HRPC' before, but some googling suggests
that its some Remote Procedure Call component they are using.
RPC basically provides access for calling software functions a device, from
another device. It might be what is being used in the stack for interswitch
softw
Agreed. I haven't gone to the effort of double checking Brett's work - but
the approach is definately the right one. It's very common for a developer
to screw up a pointer or boolean operation, just sometimes these bugs
actually make it past testing. I wouldn't be surprised.. Also, what's the
point
Thats a very good point John!
Any thoughts why a cat5 <5m non-erroring link with auto on both ends that
negotiates 100/full would sometimes (once,twice per week) drop down
(10/half) and then back up again shortly after?
Forcing both ends 'fixes' it (stops the flaps).. Seen that one before?
Cheers
Hahahaha nice :)
On 20 August 2010 11:46, Thomas Habets wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Aug 2010, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>
>> Duplex seems to be a big mystery in most organizations, I've heard so many
>> misconceptions about it it's scary, I'd say it's one of the biggest causes
>> of bad performance in m
n mind for when
that happens though!
Cheers!!
On 20 August 2010 10:12, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 10:03:12AM +0100, Heath Jones wrote:
> > You response appreciated. One fatal assumption though is me only forcing
> one
> > end of the link - w
Heath
On 20 August 2010 09:48, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 07:33:14AM +0100, Heath Jones wrote:
> > I'm really curious as to why there are many people here saying forcing
> ports
> > is a bad thing though. I was pretty surprised to be rea
n Fri, 2010-08-20 at 07:33 +0100, Heath Jones wrote:
> > I'm really curious as to why there are many people here saying forcing
> > ports is a bad thing though. I was pretty surprised to be reading that
> > actually, its good to have another perspective on the idea.
>
> IMO
Thats an interesting point! I had that problem yesterday with a ethernet
extension service CPE connecting to 2800. The CPE didn't like no auto.
I'm really curious as to why there are many people here saying forcing ports
is a bad thing though. I was pretty surprised to be reading that actually,
it
If it's any help at all, I downloaded GNS3 about 3 weeks ago and with
relatively recent IOS, its working fine and I can force to 100/full.
Andreas is right.. So is it possible for you to upgrade to latest dynamips?
On 18 August 2010 09:44, Andreas Sikkema wrote:
> Jeferson,
>
> > why no one rea
Oh I'd definitely draw the line at this single post about a mediocre cause,
Jay.
I couldn't even fathom how quickly the world would crumble if he did it on
more than one technical mailing list! That would be worse than say - I don't
know - a natural disaster in Pakistan!!
__
Hi Vijay - there could be a number of things wrong here..
Are you seeing increasing errors on any interface? (potential link related
issue)
Are all the CDP neighbors actually showing in 'show cdp neighbor' as
expected? (potential implementation bug)
In order to answer your question about a potent
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
