Re: [c-nsp] Cisco ASR 9K Vs 7600

2010-12-02 Thread raymondh (NSP)
If i didn't recall wrongly uRPF for IPv6 has been confirmed under Q1-Q2 2011 under the 4.1 stream. - Please contact your Cisco rep. on that to confirm on the status. It's not an EARL based platform. on the XR has a couple of limitation on SNMP support for V6 but I've got a strong feeling that

Re: [c-nsp] Monitor traffic on Cisco Routers

2010-12-02 Thread raymondh (NSP)
SPAN is too CPU based. As per one of the members proposed, use netflow that's the best way to achieve. if you do have a heavy load, set a high sampling rate. --raymondh On 03-Dec-2010, at 12:17 AM, Joe Loiacono wrote: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net wrote on 12/01/2010 09:51:44 PM: How I

Re: [c-nsp] Cisco ASR 9K Vs 7600

2010-12-01 Thread raymondh (NSP)
I believe the greatest difference which _may_ or will happen will be its roadmap on the 100G cards ? I doubt it'll be happening on a 1:1 basis on the 7600, you may want to verify with your Cisco account rep. Nothing is bug free, which includes printing hello world. look at the brighter side,

Re: [c-nsp] Opinions of DDoS appliances, other techniques, most notably Cisco Guard

2009-04-13 Thread raymondh (NSP)
Personally, if cost isn't an issue and you're expecting to sink high volume of traffic, I'd suggest that you go for Peakflow SP together with TMS (It's still ranked as one of the better ones among the rest). Else the ADM + AGM should work well enough. Generally for the MARS boxes, I'd

Re: [c-nsp] show inventory

2009-04-05 Thread raymondh (NSP)
try this. sh invent raw --raymondh On Apr 5, 2009, at 5:40 PM, Mohammad Khalil wrote: Hey all i issue the command show inventory on some devices and no output is there and the other is ok any ideas ? _ More than

Re: [c-nsp] Need help figuring out IOS versions / featuresets / MIBs

2008-11-25 Thread raymondh (NSP)
What you're looking for would be more on the AAA portion. Are you looking at any particular features inside ISG ? e.g. Subscriber Aware ? Some chassis does not support certain features of the ISG. Do take note of the VSA(s) too. --raymondh On Nov 25, 2008, at 4:57 PM, Niels den Otter

Re: [c-nsp] Alternatives to Cisco's TACACS server?

2008-11-24 Thread raymondh (NSP)
You'll just need to fix your expressions in your tacacs config. e.g. cmd = set { permit ^blah blah .* } --raymondh On Nov 25, 2008, at 12:16 AM, Christian Koch wrote: Rich- thanks and sorry i guess i was a little vague... i meant to say i am looking for configuration for the tac_plus.conf

Re: [c-nsp] IOS compatability

2008-11-21 Thread raymondh (NSP)
See the in-lines. --raymondh On Nov 21, 2008, at 7:55 PM, ambedkar wrote: Hi, 1. Is it possible to use the IOS of Cisco-3845(ver 12.4) on Cisco-3600 that is currently running IOS ver 12.2 ??? No. 2. Is the Cisco IOS specific to the series or can be used across different models?

Re: [c-nsp] downloads broken?

2008-11-20 Thread raymondh (NSP)
They seriously need to buck up big time and get a few folks to take the slightest effort to maintain the integrity of their online documentations or even guides. Especially towards their features docs. Crap. Zzz... --raymondh On Nov 20, 2008, at 10:30 PM, Marko Milivojevic wrote:

Re: [c-nsp] downloads broken?

2008-11-18 Thread raymondh (NSP)
I think they're doing some migration. Use the new download area. I'm able to download the releases via the new Download area. I've managed to download the images via the new download area but not via the conventional web navigation for IOS downloads. Managed to use wget to fetch from the

Re: [c-nsp] downloads broken?

2008-11-18 Thread raymondh (NSP)
Time to bite on the local AM and global AM too; over at the same time to keep them busy to. --raymondh On Nov 19, 2008, at 1:41 AM, Jared Mauch wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 06:36:57PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure if the rest of you care about this stuff, or about

Re: [c-nsp] downloads broken?

2008-11-18 Thread raymondh (NSP)
*shrugs* For the past few months, I haven't had any issues with the direct link which I've gotten from the browser just to get the exact path. It's definitely a pain in the ass to be going thru their site. --raymondh On Nov 19, 2008, at 1:45 AM, Jared Mauch wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at

Re: [c-nsp] Recommended Cisco boxes for a small multihoming solution?

2008-11-14 Thread raymondh (NSP)
an ASR1002 compare to a G2 combo? From a growth perspective the ASR1002 would be what I would consider giving a potential migration to GigE. Rodney On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 08:52:47PM +0800, raymondh (NSP) wrote: You may want to consider getting either part # CISCO7201 (PSU included) or 7206VXR/NPE

Re: [c-nsp] Recommended Cisco boxes for a small multihoming solution?

2008-11-13 Thread raymondh (NSP)
You may want to consider getting either part # CISCO7201 (PSU included) or 7206VXR/NPE-G2 (you need to pay for the PSU, it's quite cheap). Both the part # for the box, shouldn't be much of a difference or same. --raymondh On Nov 13, 2008, at 6:52 PM, Magnus Eriksson wrote: I'm looking for

Re: [c-nsp] Recommended Cisco boxes for a small multihoming solution?

2008-11-13 Thread raymondh (NSP)
the ASR1002 would be what I would consider giving a potential migration to GigE. Rodney On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 08:52:47PM +0800, raymondh (NSP) wrote: You may want to consider getting either part # CISCO7201 (PSU included) or 7206VXR/NPE-G2 (you need to pay for the PSU, it's quite cheap). Both