On Sunday, June 09, 2013 06:45:57 PM Frank Bulk wrote:
> I don't believe there is a version of 12.2SR for the
> 7200's that supports both DHCPv6-PD static route
> insertion AND IPv6 PBR.
According to FN (which should always be used with caution),
both of these are supported on SR* for the NPE-G2
rt Doering
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 7204VXR reboots
On Friday, June 07, 2013 10:30:38 PM Gert Doering wrote:
> Yeah, true. But my experience with 12.2SR on 7200s has
> not been very good overall,...
What kinds of problems did you have?
I've been running it
On Saturday, June 08, 2013 02:18:32 PM Gert Doering wrote:
> And, as you
> have mentioned, SRC was full of shit, so why even bother
> with SR* if I can have 12.4M/15.0M, which is *way* less
> buggy.
Agree - but as Saku mentioned, it was the best code for the
7200 (and I think, the 7600) at the
On Saturday, June 08, 2013 03:16:25 PM Sidney Boumendil
wrote:
> AFAIK, only Cat 6k, 4k, 3k, ISR series as well as ASR1k
> are concerned...
Right, that's what I know also.
Cheers,
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
__
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
>
> So how is this working? 15.0M already has all the niceness, and the
> hardware BUs are not picking it up? From the feature lists and such,
>
AFAIK, only Cat 6k, 4k, 3k, ISR series as well as ASR1k are concerned...
Hi,
On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 02:50:49PM +0200, Sidney Boumendil wrote:
> This is the promise of IOS 15.0 which comes with what Cisco calls IOS
> "componentization". The same code for example for multicast support should
> offer predictable behaviour on all hardware platform. Until there,
> deployin
Hi Gert,
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
>
> Now, I would have strongly liked to have the hardware-independent bits
> of IOS to be the same across all platforms, abstracting the hardware
> side well enough that features like "32 bit AS support" arrive on all
> platforms at ro
On (2013-06-08 14:18 +0200), Gert Doering wrote:
> platforms. And, as you have mentioned, SRC was full of shit, so why
> even bother with SR* if I can have 12.4M/15.0M, which is *way* less buggy.
This is anecdotal and not very useful to anyone. And having data is hard
(even if you're Cisco).
I
Hi,
On Sat, Jun 08, 2013 at 12:26:44PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote:
> > and given that there is
> > 15.0M, I have always questioned what use it is to have
> > support for *one* software platform in a special-case
> > IOS train, maintained by the BU inside Cisco that caused
> > the most annoyance of al
On Friday, June 07, 2013 10:30:38 PM Gert Doering wrote:
> Yeah, true. But my experience with 12.2SR on 7200s has
> not been very good overall,...
What kinds of problems did you have?
I've been running it since 2010 (which was the only/best way
to harmonize code between the NPE-G2/7201 and oth
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 03:17:54PM +0200, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On Friday, January 11, 2013 09:07:47 PM Gert Doering wrote:
>
> > All these IOS versions are ancient.
> >
> > 12.4(latest)-with-no-letters, or 15.0(latest)M would be
> > my recommendation.
>
> 12.2SR is still maintained on the 72
On Friday, January 11, 2013 09:07:47 PM Gert Doering wrote:
> All these IOS versions are ancient.
>
> 12.4(latest)-with-no-letters, or 15.0(latest)M would be
> my recommendation.
12.2SR is still maintained on the 7200-VXR platform.
As of March 2013, 12.2(33)SRE8 was released. Fair point,
ther
On 24/01/2013 1:29 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
One thing thats really biting me atm is that per-user aaa/qos support,
available in 124 mainline seems to have moved only to S train for 15x,
leaving me (again) with the interesting dilemma of which features on
which routers I want to continue using or upg
Joe Pruett wrote:
3. not really 12 vs 15, but i have never really been able to figure out
what the 'service provider' or 'sp services' feature set really means.
mpls seems to be only in the sp side, but lots of other features are
removed from sp compared to my ipsec variant. i guess by serv
On 22/01/2013 9:59 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
Nobody knows what's inside any given IOS build. As a rule of thumb,
whenever you want to turn on something new, the specific combination of
hardware + software + feature pack that you have will not support it.
(Yes, this does annoy me to no end)
Kill
Hi,
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 01:10:51PM -0800, Joe Pruett wrote:
> i have a general question about the 12.x vs 15.x versions. i have been
> running 12.4.25 on my 7206 vxr boxes and have been thinking of trying
> the 15.x stuff. there are a couple things that i haven't been able to
> figure out.
>
On 01/12/2013 12:23 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 12:14:51AM +0200, Dumitru Ciobarcianu wrote:
>> You might want to upgrade the IOS, the safest bet for you (I don't know
>> what your exact requirements are) would be one from the same train, for
>> example 12.4.(24)T8.
>
Hi,
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 12:14:51AM +0200, Dumitru Ciobarcianu wrote:
> You might want to upgrade the IOS, the safest bet for you (I don't know
> what your exact requirements are) would be one from the same train, for
> example 12.4.(24)T8.
Never ever recommend a T train image if a newer mai
On 11-Jan-13 9:20 PM, Adam Greene wrote:
We have a 7204VXR / NPE-G1 with 1GB RAM running 12.4(15)T5 which is
rebooting by itself every 4-5 days.
Most likely a memory leak somewhere. Looking trough Bug Search Tool
12.4(15)T5 has a lng list...
And since we are talking about an image from 2
: Gert Doering
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 7204VXR reboots
Thanks Gert.
Wish I knew what was causing issue.
But IOS upgrade will be good first step.
I appreciate it.
On 1/11/2013 2:07 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 02:20:33PM -0500, Ad
Thanks Gert.
Wish I knew what was causing issue.
But IOS upgrade will be good first step.
I appreciate it.
On 1/11/2013 2:07 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 02:20:33PM -0500, Adam Greene wrote:
Thinking of putting 12.2(40) on the router, which has been running fine
in a
Hi,
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 02:20:33PM -0500, Adam Greene wrote:
> Thinking of putting 12.2(40) on the router, which has been running fine
> in a separate environment on a 7206VXR/NPE400.
>
> Cisco states that 12.2(4)BW or 12.2(8)B or later are required for an
> NPE-G1. Not sure what the B mean
We have a 7204VXR / NPE-G1 with 1GB RAM running 12.4(15)T5 which is
rebooting by itself every 4-5 days.
About 11 BGP peers, 4 GRE tunnels, 4 interfaces in use plus a T1,
pushing about 100Mbps traffic.
We've failed over to an identical standby router, all the same specs,
and the same thing ha
23 matches
Mail list logo