[c-nsp] Virtual Trib / STS Payload on PA-MC-T3?

Mon Oct 26 10:46:05 EDT 2009

So you'll need to transmux the DS1s from the VT1.5/STS-1 payload into
an M13 DS3...

You'll need:

https://www.adtran.com/web/page/portal/Adtran/product/1184532L1/452

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 9:37 AM, James Dechiaro
<jdechiaro at coherecomm.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I recently placed on order a channelized OC3 to deliver local loops to customer premise. The OC3 will be terminated to an Adtran OPTI-6100, muxed down to DS3 level which will then terminate to a 7206VXR PA-MC-T3. I have just been informed from the carrier that we need to extract the timeslots using STS payload for Virtual Trib 1.5 instead of regular DS1 signal. I don't see this as a listed option for the PA-MC-T3 card, can someone confirm / recommend the correct hardware to meet this requirement?
>
> Thanks
>
> James
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: cisco-nsp-request at puck.nether.net
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 2:58:38 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: cisco-nsp Digest, Vol 83, Issue 84
>
> 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. Scratching the surface of SNMP (Peter Hicks)
>   2. Re: 7609 DHCP alternatives - EVC / Subinterfaces (Victor Lyapunov)
>   3. Cisco WebVPN (Haphaestion)
>   4. Re: Cisco WebVPN (christian)
>   5. Re: Cisco WebVPN (Samuel Petreski)
>   6. High frequent OIR issues on 7600 CISCO (samuel vuillaume)
>   7. Re: High frequent OIR issues on 7600 CISCO (Rubens Kuhl)
>   8. Re: High frequent OIR issues on 7600 CISCO (Mikael Abrahamsson)
>   9. Re: PBR v VRF for source-based routing (Arie Vayner (avayner))
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 21:14:15 +0000
> From: Peter Hicks <peter.hicks at poggs.co.uk>
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] Scratching the surface of SNMP
> Message-ID: <4AE4BFA7.10608 at poggs.co.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> All,
>
> I am writing an NMS and coming unstuck on a few things:
>
>  * Determining which devices are on a port on a device that doesn't
> support BRIDGE-MIB::dot1dTpFdbTable, e.g. Cisco 1801 or 877W
>
>  * Listing the VRFs and RDs configured on a router, and which
> interfaces are a member of which VRF
>
>  * Finding out which VLANs are configured on a device, and which are
> tagged on a port
>
> Can anyone help me out with their experiences, or in the direction of a
> forum more suitable?
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Peter
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:30:46 +0200
> From: Victor Lyapunov <victor.lyapunov at gmail.com>
> To: "Arie Vayner (avayner)" <avayner at cisco.com>
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 7609 DHCP alternatives - EVC / Subinterfaces
> Message-ID:
>        <bf19ffb40910251430w6a78d4c5ob75d5cc2e8116320 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Thank you all for the replies
>
> To be honest I was leaning towards the subinterfaces alternative for
> implementing
> L3 termination points for DHCP subscribers.
>
> Just to sum things up:
>
> Subinterfaces alternative:
>
> -They comsume an internal VLAN for each subintreface.
> -For each subsciber no mac-address table is required, just and ARP entry.
>
> EVC alternative:
>
> -Using a bridge domain only one VLAN will suffice.
> -But because of the bridge-domain the 7600 will have to populate its mac-address
> table with one entry for each subscriber.
>
> -Also since the evc-alternative is "partly L2 based" the dhcp-snooping security
> mechanisms can be employed.
>
> I am concerned about the mac-address capacity. Since servicing DHCP subscribers
> in ES+ is purely a L3 service there should be no need to populate the
> mac-table with
> extra entries (in this way more resources can be used for other L2 services).
>
> Victor
>
>>On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Arie Vayner (avayner) <avayner at cisco.com> wrote:
>> Victor,
>>
>> Use the EVC alternative.
>> It would allow you to get the flexibility offered by EVC with regards to
>> VLAN number space, L2 services scalability, QOS and many other advanced
>> capabilities.
>>
>> Arie
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
>> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Victor Lyapunov
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 09:54
>> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> Subject: [c-nsp] 7609 DHCP alternatives - EVC / Subinterfaces
>>
>> Hi All
>>
>> I am trying to test DHCP functionality with 7600 router. Traffic
>> arrives from all customer facing interfaces (ES+), arrive using the
>> same VLAN. 7600 perfoms DHCP relay and acts as a gateway for all of
>> them. With the new cards ES+ we have two options for the configuration
>> of customer facing interfaces
>>
>> 1. Using EVC + SVI interface
>>
>> ?int g4/1
>> ? ? service instance 100 ethernet
>> ? ? encapsulation dot1q 100
>> ? ? rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
>> ? ? bridge-domain 100 split-horizon
>> ?int g4/2
>> ? ? service instance 100 ethernet
>> ? ? encapsulation dot1q 100
>> ? ? rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
>> ? ? bridge-domain 100 split-horizon
>>
>> ?int Vlan 100
>> ? ? ip address 10.0.0.1 255.255.255.0
>> ? ? ip helper address 192.168.0.1
>>
>> 2. Using IP subinterfaces
>>
>> ?int loopback 100
>> ? ? ip address 10.0.0.1 255.255.255.0
>>
>> ?int g4/1.100
>> ? ? encapsulation dot1q 100
>> ? ? ip address unnumbered loopback 100
>> ? ? ip helper address 192.168.0.1
>>
>> ?int g4/2.100
>> ? ? encapsulation dot1q 100
>> ? ? ip address unnumbered loopback 100
>> ? ? ip helper address 192.168.0.1
>>
>>
>> Both configurations seem to achieve the same effect but I am not sure
>> which one
>> is the preferable for large amount of traffic / subscribers.
>>
>> For example due to the bridge domain I would expect that the first
>> alternative will
>> create more entries in the mac-address table.
>>
>> Thanx
>>
>> Victor
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 3
> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:11:30 +0100
> From: "Haphaestion" <haphaestion at gmail.com>
> To: <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco WebVPN
> Message-ID: <003901ca55c8$7d2a1310$777e3930$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
> Hi guys,
>
> Anyone knows what the maximum number of simultaneous connections with Cisco
> WebVPN SSL is?
> Or does this depend on the router (3725 etc.) it runs on?
> Thanks.
>
> Jack
>
> Jack Ryan
> Network Architecture
> National Railway System
> haphaestion at gmail.com
> nsosoc at gmail.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 16:31:55 -0700
> From: christian <christian at automatick.net>
> To: Haphaestion <haphaestion at gmail.com>
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco WebVPN
> Message-ID:
>        <c4d480f60910251631q770a878eoa4a4b35495cf501b at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> see table 4
>
>  http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/iosswrel/ps6537/ps6586/ps6657/product_data_sheet0900aecd80405e25.html
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Haphaestion <haphaestion at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> Anyone knows what the maximum number of simultaneous connections with Cisco
>> WebVPN SSL is?
>> Or does this depend on the router (3725 etc.) it runs on?
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Jack
>>
>> Jack Ryan
>> Network Architecture
>> National Railway System
>> haphaestion at gmail.com
>> nsosoc at gmail.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: 5
> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:39:21 -0400
> From: "Samuel Petreski" <sp446 at georgetown.edu>
> To: "'Haphaestion'" <haphaestion at gmail.com>,
>        <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco WebVPN
> Message-ID: <005101ca55cc$60d595a0$2280c0e0$@edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
> The number of concurrent SSL connections depends on the number of SSL
> licenses purchased and the maximum number of supported SSL connections by
> your device. The lower number of both is the number of maximum SSL
> connections your device can currently offer.
>
> --Samuel
>
> --
> Samuel Petreski
> Sr. Security Analyst
> Georgetown University
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Haphaestion
> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 2009 7:12 PM
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco WebVPN
>
> Hi guys,
>
> Anyone knows what the maximum number of simultaneous connections with Cisco
> WebVPN SSL is?
> Or does this depend on the router (3725 etc.) it runs on?
> Thanks.
>
> Jack
>
> Jack Ryan
> Network Architecture
> National Railway System
> haphaestion at gmail.com
> nsosoc at gmail.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 6
> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:06:58 -0400
> From: samuel vuillaume <vuillaumes at gmail.com>
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] High frequent OIR issues on 7600 CISCO
> Message-ID:
>        <dd3e48e0910252006x36a226fgc50257e59fa934bc at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> i'd like to share with you my concerns regarding the 7600 CISCO chassis....
> For many weeks, we've been experiencing a high frequent Card and chassis
> failure during  an Online Insertion removal action.....
>
> 2 weeks ago, we inserted a new ES card into a 7600.... that one tore down
> all the vpls circuits, and we needed to reboot the Chassis to bring them up!
>
> Yesterday night, as per a Cisco recommendation, we needed to swap a SIP600
> card into a 7600 to fix a faulty Temp sensor.....As a result:
>
> - New SIP600 inserted into the module 4 (as previously)
> - Module 7-8-9 were down and stuck in Diagnostic mode
> - 90% of our VLANs into the chassis were down!
>
> After a reboot, it was even worst! the ultimate solution has been the
> chassis replacement!!! and the funny thing is the syslog message is still
> coming up!!! Temp sensor error!!!!
>
> CISCO have no comments.....
>
> Has anybody experienced the same kind of issue on 7600/6500?
>
> Tks for sharing
> Sam
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 01:19:38 -0200
> From: Rubens Kuhl <rubensk at gmail.com>
> To: Cisco-nsp <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] High frequent OIR issues on 7600 CISCO
> Message-ID:
>        <6bb5f5b10910252019k5d3b3042g1fcd52bb7826710c at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 1:06 AM, samuel vuillaume <vuillaumes at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>> i'd like to share with you my concerns regarding the 7600 CISCO chassis....
>> For many weeks, we've been experiencing a high frequent Card and chassis
>> failure during ?an Online Insertion removal action.....
>
> There is a reason why OIR stands for "Online Insertion and Reboot"...
> so people can make things like this on maintenance windows.
>
>
>
> Rubens
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 07:27:19 +0100 (CET)
> From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike at swm.pp.se>
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] High frequent OIR issues on 7600 CISCO
> Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0910260724180.5824 at uplift.swm.pp.se>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009, samuel vuillaume wrote:
>
>> Has anybody experienced the same kind of issue on 7600/6500?
>
> Having handled quite a few tens of 7600, the only chassis replacement I
> can remember was one in the lab where the backplane/fabric connectors were
> demolished after inserting a linecard and the chassis needed replacement.
>
> When doing OIR in 7600 there is a peg which stalls the bus during
> insertion (I believe it's still there anyway), so insertion should be firm
> without being violent to work the best. If all these errors is happening
> to a single person, it might be worthwile to look into the technique used
> to insert the linecards, it might well affect the outcome of the
> insertion.
>
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 07:58:24 +0100
> From: "Arie Vayner (avayner)" <avayner at cisco.com>
> To: "Philip Davis" <pdavis at i2k.com>, "Cisco-nsp"
>        <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] PBR v VRF for source-based routing
> Message-ID:
>        <FDD1CDB3FB499E4087CC7670BBCA22C6837FFA at XMB-AMS-101.cisco.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
> Phil,
>
> Can you explain a bit more about your specific requirement?
>
> Arie
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Philip Davis
> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 17:34
> To: 'Cisco-nsp'
> Subject: [c-nsp] PBR v VRF for source-based routing
>
> Hello,
>
>  From reading documentation, it appears that PBR and VRF-lite can both
> be used to implement cases of source-based routing. I have only used PBR
>
> for this, and most VRF documentation seems to be in the context of MPLS
> or L3VPNs. What are the pros and cons of one vs the other? Am I all wet
> that VRF can do this at all?
>
> Thanks,
> Phil
> _______________________________________________
> 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 83, Issue 84
> *****************************************
>
> --
> James Dechiaro
> COO
> Cohere Communications, LLC.
> 509 Madison Avenue, Suite 604
> New York, NY 10022
> Office 212-404-6904
> efax   212-937-3727
> www.coherecomm.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>