[c-nsp] Re: cisco-nsp Digest, Vol 27, Issue 41
Alban Dani
albcisco at gmail.com
Wed Feb 9 16:39:05 EST 2005
Hi,
here are some outputs:
cat6509#sh interfaces gig 4/16 trunk
Port Mode Encapsulation Status Native vlan
Gi4/16 on 802.1q trunking 1
Port Vlans allowed on trunk
Gi4/16 1,5,8,13,17,21-22,27,41,43,63,68,70-71,73,76,83,101-102
Port Vlans allowed and active in management domain
Gi4/16 1,5,8,13,17,21-22,27,41,43,63,68,70-71,73,76,83,101-102
Port Vlans in spanning tree forwarding state and not pruned
Gi4/16 1,13,17,21-22,27,41,43,63,68,70-71,73,83,101-102
*************
cat6509.cc#sh vtp status
VTP Version : 2
Configuration Revision : 299
Maximum VLANs supported locally : 1005
Number of existing VLANs : 136
VTP Operating Mode : Server
VTP Domain Name : vtpdomain
VTP Pruning Mode : Enabled
VTP V2 Mode : Enabled
VTP Traps Generation : Disabled
*****************
cat2950#sh vtp status
VTP Version : 2
Configuration Revision : 299
Maximum VLANs supported locally : 250
Number of existing VLANs : 136
VTP Operating Mode : Client
VTP Domain Name : vtpdomain
VTP Pruning Mode : Enabled
VTP V2 Mode : Enabled
VTP Traps Generation : Enabled
Maybe I have said this before but the show spanning-tree commands also
show that everything is in order.
I opened a tac case with cisco.. and I can feel its going nowhere.
Alban
On Wed, 9 Feb 2005 11:10:50 -0500 (EST),
cisco-nsp-request at puck.nether.net <cisco-nsp-request at puck.nether.net>
wrote:
> Send cisco-nsp mailing list submissions to
> cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cisco-nsp-request at puck.nether.net
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cisco-nsp-owner at puck.nether.net
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of cisco-nsp digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. RE: Vlans and catalyst 2950 (Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer))
> 2. Re: Vlans and catalyst 2950 (Adrian Pirciu)
> 3. Re: VPN failover / load sharing using IOS? (Luan Nguyen)
> 4. Re: Cisco 3550 maximum number of routable interfaces limit?
> (Matthew Crocker)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 16:33:59 +0100
> From: "Oliver Boehmer \(oboehmer\)" <oboehmer at cisco.com>
> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Vlans and catalyst 2950
> To: "Alban Dani" <albcisco at gmail.com>, "Adrian Pirciu"
> <adrian.pirciu at rdsnet.ro>
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Message-ID:
> <70B7A1CCBFA5C649BD562B6D9F7ED78474CA3B at xmb-ams-333.emea.cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Alban,
>
> Did you enable vtp pruning? Can you send a "show trunk x/y" (CatOS) or
> "show int xxx trunk" (IOS) on your Cat6k/core switch? It could be that
> the 6k incorrectly pruned Vlan41 from the trunk. Workaround: disable vtp
> pruning..
>
> oli
>
> Alban Dani <> wrote on Wednesday, February 09, 2005 4:24 PM:
>
> > Hi there,
> >
> > we are using VTP. All the new Vlans are created on the 6509 which is
> > the core.
> >
> > Here is the output of the show vlan on the cat2950:
> >
> > cat2950#sh vlan id 41
> > VLAN Name Status Ports
> > ---- -------------------------------- ---------
> > ------------------------------- 41 Stevens
> > active Fa0/6, Fa0/35, Fa0/46, Gi0/1 VLAN Type SAID MTU
> > Parent RingNo BridgeNo Stp BrdgMode Trans1 Trans2 ---- -----
> > ---------- ----- ------ ------ -------- ---- -------- ------ ------
> > 41 enet 100041 1500 - - - - - 0
> > 0 Remote SPAN VLAN ----------------
> > Disabled
> > Primary Secondary Type Ports
> >
> > cat2950#sh spanning-tree vlan 41
> >
> > VLAN0041
> > Spanning tree enabled protocol ieee
> > Root ID Priority 24617
> > Address 0009.b799.a680
> > Cost 28
> > Port 49 (GigabitEthernet0/1)
> > Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
> >
> > Bridge ID Priority 32809 (priority 32768 sys-id-ext 41)
> > Address 000b.fd53.9540
> > Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
> > Aging Time 300
> >
> > Interface Role Sts Cost Prio.Nbr Type
> > ---------------- ---- --- --------- --------
> > -------------------------------- Fa0/35 Desg FWD 19
> > 128.35 P2p
> > Fa0/46 Desg FWD 19 128.46 P2p
> > Gi0/1 Root FWD 4 128.49 P2p
> >
> > Port Fa0/35 is trunked and Vlan 41 never makes it up this trunk unless
> > as I have explained I put a port on cat2950 on that vlan and get some
> > traffic in it.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Alban
> >
> > On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 10:58:15 +0200, Adrian Pirciu
> > <adrian.pirciu at rdsnet.ro> wrote:
> >> Hello
> >>
> >> Alban Dani wrote:
> >>> Hello Matthew,
> >>>
> >>> I also am having a very wierd issue with vlans and 2950-s.
> >>>
> >>> We are running pst+.
> >>> We have a 6509 in the core and everytime we try to get a new vlan
> >>> passed through a chain of switches( all connected via dot1q trunks)
> >>> that has a 2950 in it, it does not work. The only workaround we
> >>> found so far is to go to a port on the given 2950 , set the port on
> >>> the requried vlan and connect a machine to it and through some
> >>> traffic. That makes the 2950 aware of that vlan.
> >>
> >> a 2950 will not pass traffic for the vlans not defined in its table.
> >> When you put a port in a vlan, it automatically adds this vlan to the
> >> config (sh vlan) and it starts forwarding traffic for that vlan which
> >> explains the behaviour you describe.
> >>
> >> You can use VTP if you want to have a consistent vlan database
> >> accross you network. Be careful though (there are some bat things
> >> that can happen, read the documentation from www.cisco.com and they
> >> are described).
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> If this was not enough, if the vlan in question does not see traffic
> >>> for a couple of days the 2950 totally forgets about it.
> >>
> >> I am not aware of anything resembling this behaviour. Anybody ? Does
> >> the vlan apper on "sh vlan" when this happens ?
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I am wondering if you ever found a solution to your problem and if
> >>> so what was it?
> >>>
> >>> I have upgraded to the latest IOS but it did not help.
> >>
> >> i'm pretty sure it is not an IOS/switch related problem.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> thanks,
> >>>
> >>> Alban
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> >>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >>
> >> --
> >> adixor
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 17:46:22 +0200
> From: Adrian Pirciu <adrian.pirciu at rdsnet.ro>
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Vlans and catalyst 2950
> To: Alban Dani <albcisco at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Message-ID: <420A304E.4060502 at rdsnet.ro>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
> try creating a new vlan on the 6500 and then use sh vlan to see if it
> is created automatically on the 29xx. If not, there is a vtp
> configuration mismatch somewhere.
>
> add some outputs of "sh vtp status" on the 6500 and 29xx if you can
> please.
>
> Alban Dani wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > we are using VTP. All the new Vlans are created on the 6509 which is the core.
> >
> > Here is the output of the show vlan on the cat2950:
> >
> > cat2950#sh vlan id 41
> > VLAN Name Status Ports
> > ---- -------------------------------- --------- -------------------------------
> > 41 Stevens active Fa0/6, Fa0/35, Fa0/46, Gi0/1
> > VLAN Type SAID MTU Parent RingNo BridgeNo Stp BrdgMode Trans1 Trans2
> > ---- ----- ---------- ----- ------ ------ -------- ---- -------- ------ ------
> > 41 enet 100041 1500 - - - - - 0 0
> > Remote SPAN VLAN
> > ----------------
> > Disabled
> > Primary Secondary Type Ports
> >
> > cat2950#sh spanning-tree vlan 41
> >
> > VLAN0041
> > Spanning tree enabled protocol ieee
> > Root ID Priority 24617
> > Address 0009.b799.a680
> > Cost 28
> > Port 49 (GigabitEthernet0/1)
> > Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
> >
> > Bridge ID Priority 32809 (priority 32768 sys-id-ext 41)
> > Address 000b.fd53.9540
> > Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
> > Aging Time 300
> >
> > Interface Role Sts Cost Prio.Nbr Type
> > ---------------- ---- --- --------- -------- --------------------------------
> > Fa0/35 Desg FWD 19 128.35 P2p
> > Fa0/46 Desg FWD 19 128.46 P2p
> > Gi0/1 Root FWD 4 128.49 P2p
> >
> > Port Fa0/35 is trunked and Vlan 41 never makes it up this trunk unless
> > as I have explained I put a port on cat2950 on that vlan and get some
> > traffic in it.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Alban
> >
> > On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 10:58:15 +0200, Adrian Pirciu
> > <adrian.pirciu at rdsnet.ro> wrote:
> >
> >>Hello
> >>
> >>Alban Dani wrote:
> >>
> >>>Hello Matthew,
> >>>
> >>>I also am having a very wierd issue with vlans and 2950-s.
> >>>
> >>>We are running pst+.
> >>>We have a 6509 in the core and everytime we try to get a new vlan
> >>>passed through a chain of switches( all connected via dot1q trunks)
> >>>that has a 2950 in it, it does not work. The only workaround we found
> >>>so far is to go to a port on the given 2950 , set the port on the
> >>>requried vlan and connect a machine to it and through some traffic.
> >>>That makes the 2950 aware of that vlan.
> >>
> >>a 2950 will not pass traffic for the vlans not defined in its table.
> >>When you put a port in a vlan, it automatically adds this vlan to the
> >>config (sh vlan) and it starts forwarding traffic for that vlan which
> >>explains the behaviour you describe.
> >>
> >>You can use VTP if you want to have a consistent vlan database accross
> >>you network. Be careful though (there are some bat things that can
> >>happen, read the documentation from www.cisco.com and they are
> >>described).
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>If this was not enough, if the vlan in question does not see traffic
> >>>for a couple of days the 2950 totally forgets about it.
> >>
> >>I am not aware of anything resembling this behaviour. Anybody ? Does
> >>the vlan apper on "sh vlan" when this happens ?
> >>
> >>
> >>>I am wondering if you ever found a solution to your problem and if so
> >>>what was it?
> >>>
> >>>I have upgraded to the latest IOS but it did not help.
> >>
> >>i'm pretty sure it is not an IOS/switch related problem.
> >>
> >>
> >>>thanks,
> >>>
> >>>Alban
> >>>_______________________________________________
> >>>cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >>>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> >>>archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >>
> >>--
> >>adixor
> >>
>
> --
> adixor
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 10:41:27 -0500
> From: Luan Nguyen <luan.nguyen at mci.com>
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VPN failover / load sharing using IOS?
> To: Brian Feeny <signal at shreve.net>, Rodney Dunn <rodunn at cisco.com>
> Cc: Cameron.Dry at didata.com.au, cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Message-ID: <008601c50ebd$d1b62470$89902799 at entserver01>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> I put a sample config for you to look at. My definition of a VPN is the
> IPSEC transport mode( or tunnel) over the GRE. So if you have dual T1 with
> their own address from different ISP, then you could build 2 VPNs, one for
> each link. The LAN side - most of the time will be 1918 address? Then just
> use EIGRP or static to create 2 routes equal cost over the 2 GRE tunnels.
> If you only have one host talking to one host on the LAN side, then there
> will not be load sharing per-destination. Per packet would do the job
> though. These are T1 so you don't need that object tracking thing. If you
> only have one host to one host then maybe do policy base routing base on the
> type of traffics so you could load share somewhat.
>
> crypto isakmp policy 1001
>
> encr 3des
>
> hash sha
>
> authentication pre-share
>
> group 2
>
> crypto isakmp key connection1 address 1.1.1.1
>
> crypto isakmp key connection2 address 2.2.2.2
>
> !
>
> crypto ipsec transform-set TRANS esp-3des esp-sha-hmac
>
> mode transport
>
> !
>
> crypto map CryptoMap1 local-address T1_1
>
> crypto map CryptoMap1 1024 ipsec-isakmp
>
> set peer 1.1.1.1
>
> set transform-set TRANS
>
> match address ACL_1
>
> !
>
> crypto map CryptoMap2 local-address T1_2
>
> crypto map CryptoMap2 1024 ipsec-isakmp
>
> set peer 2.2.2.2
>
> set transform-set TRANS
>
> match address ACL_2
>
> !
>
> interface Tunnel1
>
> description *To 2nd router - T1_1*
>
> bandwidth 1544
>
> ip unnumbered fa0/0 <--------Could use static ip like a.a.a.1 on one side
> and a.a.a.2 on the other
>
> !*UNNUMBERED TO PRIVATE LAN*
>
> ip mtu 1440
>
> tunnel source X.X.X.X
>
> tunnel destination 1.1.1.1
>
> crypto map CryptoMap1
>
> !
>
> interface Tunnel2
>
> description *To 2nd router T1_2*
>
> bandwidth 1544
>
> ip unnumbered FastEthernet0/0
>
> !*UNNUMBERED TO PRIVATE LAN*
>
> ip mtu 1440
>
> tunnel source Y.Y.Y.Y
>
> tunnel destination 2.2.2.2
>
> crypto map CryptoMap2
>
> !
>
> interface WAN1
>
> ip address X.X.X.X 255.255.255.252
>
> description *WAN 1*
>
> no ip redirects
>
> no ip unreachables
>
> no ip proxy-arp
>
> duplex full
>
> speed 100
>
> crypto map CryptoMap1
>
> !
>
> interface WAN2
>
> ip address Y.Y.Y.Y 255.255.255.252
>
> description *WAN 2*
>
> no ip redirects
>
> no ip unreachables
>
> no ip proxy-arp
>
> duplex full
>
> speed 100
>
> crypto map CryptoMap2
>
> !
>
> interface FastEthernet0.0
>
> ip address Z.Z.Z.Z 255.255.255.0
>
> description *LAN 2*
>
> no ip redirects
>
> no ip unreachables
>
> no ip proxy-arp
>
> duplex full
>
> !
>
> ip access-list extended ACL_1
>
> permit gre host X.X.X.X host 1.1.1.1
>
> ip access-list extended ACL_2
>
> permit gre host Y.Y.Y.Y host 2.2.2.2
>
> !
>
> router eigrp 1
>
> passive-interface FastEthernet0/0
>
> network Z.Z.Z.0 0.0.0.255
>
> no auto-summary
>
> eigrp stub connected
>
> !
>
> ip route 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.255 WAN1_gateway_address
>
> Ip route 2.2.2.2 255.255.255.255 WAN_2_gateway address
>
> Hope that help.
>
> Luan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brian Feeny" <signal at shreve.net>
> To: "Rodney Dunn" <rodunn at cisco.com>
> Cc: <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>; "Luan Nguyen" <luan.nguyen at mci.com>;
> <Cameron.Dry at didata.com.au>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 10:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VPN failover / load sharing using IOS?
>
> >
> > I haven't even gotten that information back yet. Are you talking about
> > the SAA object tracking stuff?
> >
> > Since their would be load sharing one link could go down and it should
> > be ok. In other words rather than a standby circuit, both circuits
> > should be live. But since after the GRE's are up and even EIGRP in
> > place, the actual IPSEC SA represents a single source/destination pair
> > (as far as the level that GRE and EIGRP are at), then that will create
> > a single flow over only one link.......which is fine I suppose. I may
> > do up a diagram to give a clearer picture of what I am trying to
> > accomplish. I am pretty sure whatever route I go the 1700's will work
> > ok for this application.
> >
> > Brian
> >
> > On Feb 9, 2005, at 7:07 AM, Rodney Dunn wrote:
> >
> > > What are your ISP connections?
> > > HDLC, PPP, *net, ?
> > >
> > > I've done a couple of desigs leveraging
> > > HSRP with Object tracking of the wan
> > > links for failover also.
> > >
> > > Rodney
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 12:18:40AM -0600, Brian Feeny wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Actually, your right. But really the vpn is establishing a single
> > >> source host to a single destination host, since whats really riding on
> > >> top of the GRE layer is the VPN itself. Like you say, per destination
> > >> balancing sort of makes it not work very well.
> > >>
> > >> Too bad cisco doesn't allow you to just define two vpn's and treat the
> > >> result as two equal paths, that would be a bit better.
> > >>
> > >> Brian
> > >>
> > >> On Feb 8, 2005, at 11:59 PM, Luan Nguyen wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> It would work just like that I think. The router would just do
> > >>> per-destination load share wouldn't it - unless you only have one
> > >>> host
> > >>> talking to one host? In our environment we have one spoke with dual
> > >>> GRE
> > >>> tunnels to 2 hubs with equal cost. Yours is a little different but
> > >>> it
> > >>> should work for load balancing just like that.
> > >>>
> > >>> Luan
> > >>>
> > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > >>> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Brian Feeny
> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 12:33 AM
> > >>> To: Rodney Dunn
> > >>> Cc: Cameron.Dry at didata.com.au; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > >>> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VPN failover / load sharing using IOS?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Rodney,
> > >>>
> > >>> I will definitely look into OER. But if I had 2 GRE tunnels, why
> > >>> can't
> > >>> I just point statics like in my example, for each remote subnet down
> > >>> the tunnels? Wouldn't that load balance AND work for failover?
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>>
> > >>> Brian
> > >>>
> > >>> On Feb 8, 2005, at 11:20 PM, Rodney Dunn wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> There are really on two ways to do this:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> a) you announce some subset of routes down
> > >>>> one gre tunnel from the headend and prefer
> > >>>> them and the other subset over the backup tunnel
> > >>>>
> > >>>> that way if one tunnel goes away you will have failover.
> > >>>> The drawback there is the load sharing isn't dynamic.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> The only way you can get dynamic loadsharing in
> > >>>> this type of setup is OER.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> b) Do OER at the spoke side and let it load balance
> > >>>> the traffic back towards the headend.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> They were going to put a sample of that in the OER
> > >>>> deployment guide but I'm not sure they have gotten
> > >>>> to it yet.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> http://www.cisco.com/go/oer
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Rodney
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Tue, Feb 08, 2005 at 10:31:43PM -0600, Brian Feeny wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> thanks, although that looks to be for sites with multiple routers
> > >>>>> and
> > >>>>> multiple links. Each of these sites is only going to have one
> > >>>>> router,
> > >>>>> that takes in 2 T1's. I don't think that will work in that
> > >>>>> scenrio.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Brian
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Feb 8, 2005, at 10:07 PM, Cameron.Dry at didata.com.au wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Check out:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5012/
> > >>>>>> products_feature_
> > >>>>>> guide09186a00800ed370.html
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Cameron
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > >>>>>> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > >>>>>> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> > >>>>>> signal at shreve.net
> > >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2005 11:50 AM
> > >>>>>> To: 'cisco-nsp'
> > >>>>>> Subject: [c-nsp] VPN failover / load sharing using IOS?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Has anyone done any type of VPN failover and/or load balancing
> > >>>>>> using
> > >>>>>> IOS?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> For example something like a 2 1700 routers, each with 2 T1 cards
> > >>>>>> in
> > >>>>>> them,
> > >>>>>> Each T1 card would be connected to a different ISP, each with its
> > >>>>>> own
> > >>>>>> IP space
> > >>>>>> (no BGP). Either T1 would be able to go down, and the VPN could
> > >>>>>> re-establish
> > >>>>>> itself over the remaining T1. Both T1's would be load balanced
> > >>>>>> over
> > >>>>>> for VPN
> > >>>>>> connectivity.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Is it possible to establish 2 VPN's, 1 over each link, with the
> > >>>>>> same
> > >>>>>> source/destination private networks defined, and have the router
> > >>>>>> load
> > >>>>>> balance these and also work in failover?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Another thought, which is kind of ugly (but maybe not), is 2 GRE
> > >>>>>> tunnels, and then dual static routes over the tunnels:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Router 1 T1 #1 <----------------------- GRE Tunnel #1
> > >>>>>> -------------------> Router 2 T1 #1
> > >>>>>> Router 2 T1 #2 <------------------------ GRE Tunnel #2
> > >>>>>> -------------------> Router 2 T1 #2
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> ip route <insert vpn endpoint ip> 255.255.255.255 Tunnel1
> > >>>>>> ip route <insert vpn endpoint ip> 255.255.255.255 Tunnel2
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Then establish the VPN on top of the above. I don't particular
> > >>>>>> like
> > >>>>>> the idea of building a tunnel on top of 2 other tunnels, so if
> > >>>>>> anyone
> > >>>>>> has experience in doing this type of setup, please share what you
> > >>>>>> used
> > >>>>>> to do it.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Brian
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Brian Feeny, CCIE #8036, CISSP
> > >>>>>> Network Engineer
> > >>>>>> ShreveNet Inc.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>>> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > >>>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > >>>>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> ******************************************************************
> > >>>>>> **
> > >>>>>> *
> > >>>>>> **
> > >>>>>> *******
> > >>>>>> - NOTICE FROM DIMENSION DATA AUSTRALIA
> > >>>>>> This message is confidential, and may contain proprietary or
> > >>>>>> legally
> > >>>>>> privileged information. If you have received this email in error,
> > >>>>>> please notify the sender and delete it immediately.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Internet communications are not secure. You should scan this
> > >>>>>> message
> > >>>>>> and any attachments for viruses. Under no circumstances do we
> > >>>>>> accept
> > >>>>>> liability for any loss or damage which may result from your
> > >>>>>> receipt
> > >>>>>> of
> > >>>>>> this message or any attachments.
> > >>>>>> ******************************************************************
> > >>>>>> **
> > >>>>>> *
> > >>>>>> **
> > >>>>>> *******
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>>> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > >>>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > >>>>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Brian Feeny, CCIE #8036, CISSP
> > >>>>> Network Engineer
> > >>>>> ShreveNet Inc.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > >>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > >>>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > >>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> > >>>
> > >>>
> >
> > Brian Feeny, CCIE #8036, CISSP
> > Network Engineer
> > ShreveNet Inc.
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 11:10:12 -0500
> From: Matthew Crocker <matthew at crocker.com>
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 3550 maximum number of routable interfaces
> limit?
> To: "Adam Greene" <maillist at webjogger.net>
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Message-ID: <961cc76a582262da43ae00e4e48fee56 at crocker.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
> We use a 3550 to aggregate our T1 traffic. We have a Seranoa WANPort
> (IPeX) which terminates channelized DS-3s into 802.1q VLANs. We take
> the GigE from the Seranoa and run it into a 3550. The 3550 config has
> a 'interface VLAN' for each T1 customer, with ip subnet and static
> routes assigned. The 3550 is a member in our OSPF area 0 announcing
> customer routes. We have about 30 'Interface vlan' configured right
> now passing about 16mbps of traffic without any problems. CEF is
> running but I heard after 8 interfaces everything is punted to process
> switched. We are at 1% CPU so I'm not sure about that either. I plan
> on adding another 100 or so interfaces to this box, hopefully it
> doesn't melt on me
>
> -matt
>
> On Feb 9, 2005, at 8:43 AM, Adam Greene wrote:
>
> > This has been quite useful to me, too. We shied away from purchasing
> > 3550's
> > a while back because we were looking to put up to 256 SVI's on whatever
> > layer 3 switch we got. We went with the Extreme Summit series instead
> > (200-24 and 48si).
> >
> > However, it's sounding like even with 256 SVI's, if I keep the routing
> > table
> > small (for example, our Extremes only have about 50 right now), we
> > could
> > still consider 3550's. In fact, since we may need to upgrade our
> > Summit200-24 soon, this puts the 3550 back on the map for me.
> >
> > Anyone else doing lots of SVI's in an OSPF environment with relatively
> > few
> > routes?
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Marcel Lammerse" <lammerse at xs4all.nl>
> > To: "cisco-nsp" <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 12:26 AM
> > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco 3550 maximum number of routable interfaces
> > limit?
> >
> >
> >> Thanks all, I know a lot more abot 3550 performance now :-)
> >>
> >> Marcel
> >>
> >> On Feb 7, 2005, at 9:46 PM, Mark Boolootian wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> show sdm prefer only shows you the current template and numbers from
> >>>> the
> >>>> published tables. I'm more interested in tcam resources actually
> >>>> used/available on the live switches.
> >>>
> >>> You and me both. Surely you know about 'show tcam...'. I would
> >>> prefer an interface that allowed me to say 'show tcam statistics'
> >>> providing a matrix of utilization stats (including stats on routes).
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> >>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> >> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >> ---
> >> [This e-mail was scanned for viruses by Webjogger's AntiVirus
> >> Protection
> > System]
> >>
> >>
> >
> > ---
> > [This e-mail was scanned for viruses by Webjogger's AntiVirus
> > Protection System]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list
> cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>
> End of cisco-nsp Digest, Vol 27, Issue 41
> *****************************************
>
More information about the cisco-nsp
mailing list