Try using the latest 9.4 release. A revision was made to address
unknown SFPs the same way as it was back in 9.1. It may or may not
work for you but its worth a try.
-Ariff
On Feb 14, 2009, at 4:26 PM, Jeff S Wheeler wrote:
On Sat, 2009-02-14 at 23:54 +, Leigh Porter wrote:
Rather th
algorithm, thanks ..
thanks Ariff
luis
2008/11/17 Ariff Premji <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Luis,
A couple of questions.
1. What is the hw platform?
2. Is there enough variance in the traffic itself? The reason
being that the algorithm is based on a hash mechanism that ensures
that packets belong
Luis,
A couple of questions.
1. What is the hw platform?
2. Is there enough variance in the traffic itself? The reason being
that the algorithm is based on a hash mechanism that ensures that
packets belonging to the same flow always ride the same path. So if
there isnt enough variance in
You need a policy exported to the forwarding table. This policy is
required for all flow-based load-balancing as well as for FRR. The
"per-packet" keyword is misleading. It doesent really mean per-packet.
Add this to your config and it should take care of the load-balancing.
policy-options
The numbering scheme itself allows for higher vlan numbers but the
total number of vlans may not exceed the number you sawdepending on
the hardware you have. There are other numbering schemes that come
into play if you are doing vlan-ccc etc.
Check out:
http://tinyurl.com/35h6cz
So to answe
A guess would be that your prefix is not considered active any more
(once you nuked the ibgp?). Check to see if these routes are
active. Policies only work on active routes. So you may also want
to check your policy so that it is not referencing a protocol which
has a higher (less prefer
que to load balance multiple E1s b/w two
> PEs? What do you say if i make single LSP & put 'least-fill'
> option. Will it help?
>
> Regards
> -FJ
>
>
> On 9/26/07, Ariff Premji <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Farhan,
> Not knowing much about the traffic
Farhan,
Not knowing much about the traffic or the number of VPNs, a couple of
things you can try without the multi-link feature set:
forwarding-options {
hash-key {
family inet {
layer-3;
layer-4;
}
family mpls {
label-1;
rt_cnt dip_id ref_cnt
> -
> nsisg2000->
>
> But I know, that translating working and I have log in NSM Log Viewer.
> I have problem, what set that get xlate command show me online
> utilization.
>
> regards,
>
> lag0da
>
>
> Wiadomość Orygin
Not sure if many screenOS folks are on this list. Hopefully this helps:
I think what you are look for is:
> get interface dip
This info is also available via snmp.
The other thing you may find interesting is the alarming on the fix-
port pool so that you (example below):
> set dip alarm-r
Beny,
I'de have to check but I dont believe vrf-table-label is currently
supported on PE-P or PE-PE interfaces where the you use agg-sonet.
If you need to make this work with agg-sonet, you will need a tunnel-
pic (or vt interface) as described at this link:
http://tinyurl.com/yrjbt5
To wor
Not sure if you've explore this option or not. You dont need to
setup LSPs to your RR. You can place a 0/0 route in inet.3 on the RR
so that all learnt routes appear as resolvable and hence reflected.
Take a look at the RR config at:
http://www.apricot2006.net/slides/tutorial/tuesday/L3VPN_
12 matches
Mail list logo
