QinQ would definitely be show stopper for me too. Are you
sure it's not there? At least it can be configured, but
couldn't find anyone with ASR1k who could test it on this
short notice.
I got it directly from the BU that it wouldn't be supported
until RLS2, and a customer configured it just
On (2008-09-16 07:10 +0200), Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists wrote:
However, I had a meeting with the (a?) PM yesterday, and he
assured me it is in RLS1. The other thing is probably a bug
then.
Ok so far we've listed EoMPLS and VPLS as definitely missing software
features, I still wonder what the
On (2008-09-14 22:50 +0200), Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists wrote:
Hey,
Just out of curiosity what were main points that left you
wanting?
QinQ termination, EoMPLS, VPLS.
EoMPLS was show stopper for me, would have EFT'n it to see
more closely otherwise.
VPLS I don't care, EoMPLS + 7600 as
Feature Navigator says that IEEE 802.1Q-in-Q VLAN Tag Termination is
available in asr1000rp1-ipbase.02.01.00.122-33.XNA.bin.
I was certainly worried for a minute there :)
/Benny
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 09:50:26AM +0300, Saku Ytti wrote:
Just out of curiosity what were main points that left you
wanting?
QinQ termination, EoMPLS, VPLS.
EoMPLS was show stopper for me, would have EFT'n it to see
more closely otherwise.
VPLS I don't care, EoMPLS + 7600 as
On Monday 15 September 2008 10:48:41 Mark Tinka wrote:
The x in 100x is not the number of slots, but simply
the RU size.
Not sure what you're getting at.
Disregard.
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
On Monday 15 September 2008 04:52:40 Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists
wrote:
AFAIK, Cisco don't have a 3-slot model of the ASR1000.
The x in 100x is not the number of slots, but simply the
RU size.
Not sure what you're getting at.
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed
Just out of curiosity what were main points that left you
wanting?
QinQ termination, EoMPLS, VPLS.
-A
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at
AFAIK, Cisco don't have a 3-slot model of the ASR1000.
The x in 100x is not the number of slots, but simply the RU size.
-A
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at
On (2008-09-06 22:53 -0500), Frank Bulk wrote:
The first time I went through the ASR materials I was left with the
impression that they were launching this product with the minimum software
features and hardware support. It's going to be some time before it's as
full-featured as it really
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ben Steele
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 11:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] c7604 starter kit
I'm pretty sure it is scheduled for release in an upcoming update, I know
there was lots of hmmm's
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] c7604 starter kit
On Friday 05 September 2008 01:09:28 Saku Ytti wrote:
L3 VPN yes, TE no sure.
According to FN, MPLS-TE is unsupported. Quite surprising, actually...
Mark.
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Hello c-nsp,
For a small ISP who need to get a routing gear much more resistant do DDoS than
7200 NPE-G1/2 (with a bit over 400kpps on a POS OC3 on a G2, the router is at
100% CPU,
probably better on ethernet but...), what is the entry level 7600?
I'm new to the convoluted world of hardware
On (2008-09-04 13:23 +0200), Philippe Strauss wrote:
Hey,
chassis 7604?
This is fine it's 'S' chassis like 7606S and 7609S even though the 'S'
is not visible there and it's black and not white :). Technically it's
the same.
3bxl or 3cxl?
sup720 or rsp720?
sup720 comes 3c(xl) and rsp720
For a small ISP who need to get a routing gear much more resistant do DDoS than
7200 NPE-G1/2 (with a bit over 400kpps on a POS OC3 on a G2, the router is at
100% CPU,
probably better on ethernet but...), what is the entry level 7600?
I'm new to the convoluted world of hardware routing
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008, Philippe Strauss wrote:
I'm new to the convoluted world of hardware routing :-)
chassis 7604?
3bxl or 3cxl?
sup720 or rsp720?
Latest, same money, newer hardware, so 7604 RSP720-3CXL.
linecard: what are the SPA? distributed forwarding? we don't need it a priori.
there is
Hello,
On 9/4/08, Saku Ytti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On (2008-09-04 13:23 +0200), Philippe Strauss wrote:
Hey,
chassis 7604?
This is fine it's 'S' chassis like 7606S and 7609S even though the 'S'
is not visible there and it's black and not white :). Technically it's
the same.
* Saku Ytti wrote:
sup720 comes 3c(xl) and rsp720 comes with 3b(xl).
Vice versa you mean, don't you?
sebastian
--
SABT-RIPE PGPKEY-D008DA9C
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
On (2008-09-04 16:00 +0200), Sebastian Abt wrote:
* Saku Ytti wrote:
sup720 comes 3c(xl) and rsp720 comes with 3b(xl).
Vice versa you mean, don't you?
Indeed thanks for catching it.
--
++ytti
___
cisco-nsp mailing list
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 14:31 +0100, Adam Armstrong wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 13:23 +0200, Philippe Strauss wrote:
I've heard once upon a time a 8 port GigE linecard was available and
not anymore. will the 8 port fixed GigE (not 10/100 but only 1000) of
the cat6500 line work in a c7600?
maybe the ASR 100x router is more suitable for you.
Mathias
From:
Philippe Strauss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
Cisco NSP cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Date:
04.09.2008 14:48
Subject:
[c-nsp] c7604 starter kit
Hello c-nsp,
For a small ISP who need to get a routing gear much more resistant do DDoS
You might also look at ASR1k as next-gen PE to replace VXR. 7600 has
limitation in hardware, especially in terms of IPv6 (no IPv6 uRPF, lookup
key size has compromises in ACL usage and others). When you compare
7600 with SIP/SPA, ASR1k is even cheaper solution and much more flexible.
One
On (2008-09-04 14:01 -0300), Rubens Kuhl Jr. wrote:
Can an ASR1k handle 3 full-routing transit feeds and a hundred peers ?
Yes.
Would it require ESP5 or ESP10 ?
Shouldn't make difference other than capacity wise.
On the MPLS side, beside EoMPLS, can it do MPLS L3 VPN and MPLS-TE ?
L3 VPN
Peter Rathlev wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 14:31 +0100, Adam Armstrong wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 13:23 +0200, Philippe Strauss wrote:
I've heard once upon a time a 8 port GigE linecard was available and
not anymore. will the 8 port fixed GigE (not 10/100 but only 1000) of
the cat6500 line
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 14:44 -0500, Pete Templin wrote:
Peter Rathlev wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 14:31 +0100, Adam Armstrong wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 13:23 +0200, Philippe Strauss wrote:
I've heard once upon a time a 8 port GigE linecard was available and
not anymore. will the 8 port
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Saku Ytti
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 10:09 AM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] c7604 starter kit
On (2008-09-04 14:01 -0300), Rubens Kuhl Jr. wrote:
Can an ASR1k handle 3 full-routing transit feeds
On Friday 05 September 2008 09:47:22 Robert Gutierrez wrote:
I tried to sell management here a dual ASR1003...
AFAIK, Cisco don't have a 3-slot model of the ASR1000. You
probably meant the ASR1002 or ASR1004 :-).
Cheers,
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message
@puck.nether.net
Cc: Robert Gutierrez
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] c7604 starter kit
On Friday 05 September 2008 09:47:22 Robert Gutierrez wrote:
I tried to sell management here a dual ASR1003...
AFAIK, Cisco don't have a 3-slot model of the ASR1000. You
probably meant the ASR1002 or ASR1004
On Friday 05 September 2008 01:09:28 Saku Ytti wrote:
L3 VPN yes, TE no sure.
According to FN, MPLS-TE is unsupported. Quite surprising,
actually...
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
cisco-nsp mailing
support mpls-te on the ASR.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Tinka
Sent: Friday, 5 September 2008 11:45 AM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] c7604 starter kit
On Friday 05 September 2008 01:09:28 Saku Ytti wrote:
L3 VPN
On Friday 05 September 2008 12:45:34 Ben Steele wrote:
I'm pretty sure it is scheduled for release in an
upcoming update, I know there was lots of hmmm's when I
saw the list of current unsupported technologies during
our companies presentation, but I seem to recall most of
them set for
31 matches
Mail list logo
