[c-nsp] cisco-nsp Digest, Vol 96, Issue 98

Sun Nov 28 15:41:50 EST 2010

Hi Jack

errdisable detect on Cisco 7600 routers (not sure what you have?)

To enable error-disable detection, use the errdisable detect cause command.
Use the no form of this command to disable error-disable detection.
errdisable detect cause {all | dtp-flap | l2ptguard | link-flap | pagp-flap
| udld}
no errdisable detect cause {all | dtp-flap | l2ptguard | link-flap |
pagp-flap | udld}

OR

Depending on your Mux - check whether the mux vendor allows some kind of
detection or standby options - I used to do that on Newbridge mux's in those
days.

Hope this helps
A Raaz

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
cisco-nsp-request at puck.nether.net
Sent: 28 November 2010 17:00
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: cisco-nsp Digest, Vol 96, Issue 98

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: link flaps (jack daniels)
   2. Re: link flaps (Keegan Holley)
   3. Re: link flaps (Mindaugas Kubilius)
   4. Re: VPLS Simulation (Mohammad Khalil)
   5. rate limit (Mohammad Khalil)
   6. Re: rate limit (Jared Mauch)
   7. Re: rate limit (Keegan Holley)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 23:33:58 +0530
From: jack daniels <jckdaniels12 at gmail.com>
To: Keegan Holley <keegan.holley at sungard.com>
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] link flaps
Message-ID:
	<AANLkTinbWOg7bqaD=YDcWhpq5RRLiW-7d1LHyj45yoJg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

any comments Dear friends would be most appreciated and very helpfull for
me.

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 9:30 AM, jack daniels <jckdaniels12 at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hmm... laying intercity cables Technically good ....but not
> commercialy (which is most important).. ?:)
>
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Keegan Holley
> <keegan.holley at sungard.com> wrote:
>> You can always get a really long cable so you don't need the MUX's.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 2:49 PM, jack daniels <jckdaniels12 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> I have a scenario
>>>
>>>
>>> Router R1 --------------Ethernet
>>> Cable-----MUX----------------MUX-----------Ethernet Cable-------Router
>>> R2
>>>
>>>
>>> my MUX to MUX link flaps a lot and my traffic impacts ....I have
>>> backup links also. Can I do something that when link MUX to MUX flaps
>>> I dont
>>> use this for some time , till it stablizes.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 13:34:05 -0500
From: Keegan Holley <keegan.holley at sungard.com>
To: jack daniels <jckdaniels12 at gmail.com>
Cc: "<cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>" <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] link flaps
Message-ID: <D1E986A9-4B23-43C1-BEB0-D5F1310F214E at sungard.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=us-ascii

Could you supply more info?  What kind of link goes between the mux's?  What
kind of mux's? Why can't you just fix the link?  Is protection an option?
Can you run a second link for redundancy?

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 27, 2010, at 1:03 PM, jack daniels <jckdaniels12 at gmail.com> wrote:

> any comments Dear friends would be most appreciated and very helpfull for
me.
> 
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 9:30 AM, jack daniels <jckdaniels12 at gmail.com>
wrote:
>> Hmm... laying intercity cables Technically good ....but not
>> commercialy (which is most important)..  :)
>> 
>> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Keegan Holley
>> <keegan.holley at sungard.com> wrote:
>>> You can always get a really long cable so you don't need the MUX's.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 2:49 PM, jack daniels <jckdaniels12 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>> 
>>>> I have a scenario
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Router R1 --------------Ethernet
>>>> Cable-----MUX----------------MUX-----------Ethernet Cable-------Router
>>>> R2
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> my MUX to MUX link flaps a lot and my traffic impacts ....I have
>>>> backup links also. Can I do something that when link MUX to MUX flaps
>>>> I dont
>>>> use this for some time , till it stablizes.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 22:17:19 +0200
From: Mindaugas Kubilius <min.forums at gmail.com>
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] link flaps
Message-ID: <4CF1674F.3050904 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

If a mux link down does bring the router interface down as well, you 
could look at IP route dampening on the interface:

dampening ...

Otherwise kind of dynamic routing/BFD/IPSLA methods can be applied. E.g. 
BGP with route dampening. Or tracked static routes with IPSLA object 
tracking..

Regards,
Mindaugas

On 2010.11.27 20:03, jack daniels wrote:
> any comments Dear friends would be most appreciated and very helpfull for
me.
>
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 9:30 AM, jack daniels<jckdaniels12 at gmail.com>
wrote:
>> Hmm... laying intercity cables Technically good ....but not
>> commercialy (which is most important)..  :)
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Keegan Holley
>> <keegan.holley at sungard.com>  wrote:
>>> You can always get a really long cable so you don't need the MUX's.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 2:49 PM, jack daniels<jckdaniels12 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi guys,
>>>>
>>>> I have a scenario
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Router R1 --------------Ethernet
>>>> Cable-----MUX----------------MUX-----------Ethernet Cable-------Router
>>>> R2
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> my MUX to MUX link flaps a lot and my traffic impacts ....I have
>>>> backup links also. Can I do something that when link MUX to MUX flaps
>>>> I dont
>>>> use this for some time , till it stablizes.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 15:05:34 +0200
From: Mohammad Khalil <eng_mssk at hotmail.com>
To: <yilmazpolat at gmail.com>, <desolationrob at gmail.com>
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VPLS Simulation
Message-ID: <SNT134-w42C5893DDB55F9D39B356FA230 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1256"

Thanks all

> Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 13:10:06 +0200
> From: yilmazpolat at gmail.com
> To: desolationrob at gmail.com
> CC: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VPLS Simulation
> 
> you can only do AToM on gns. cisco support vpls on specific card and
> platforms. eg 7600 series and some specific card on that series.
> 
> 
> 2010/11/25 Robert Maier <desolationrob at gmail.com>
> 
> > the only "switch" you can use in GNS is a NM-16ESW module, i don?t think
> > that this module supports VPLS. Maybe you have this option a simulator
like
> > Boson oder packettracer ?But i think, chances are not good
> >
> > Am 24.11.2010 23:04, schrieb Mohammad Khalil:
> >
> > i have looked into GNS3 but it does not support VPLS simulation
> >> is there anyway i can simulate VPLS ?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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, 28 Nov 2010 15:50:21 +0200
From: Mohammad Khalil <eng_mssk at hotmail.com>
To: <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [c-nsp] rate limit
Message-ID: <SNT134-w47421BD5DEF31C632F3ED9FA230 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1256"

hi all

i have Cisco 7606-S with IOS c7600s72033-advipservices-mz.122-33.SRD4.bin
i am trying to rate limit outbound traffic on interface vlan , but no rate
limit or traffic shape command is there ?
what is the proper solution if applicable

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 08:55:33 -0500
From: Jared Mauch <jared at puck.nether.net>
To: Mohammad Khalil <eng_mssk at hotmail.com>
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] rate limit
Message-ID: <A55CAE14-4392-4183-BDC6-F04CADE73213 at puck.nether.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

policy-map + policer

On Nov 28, 2010, at 8:50 AM, Mohammad Khalil wrote:

> 
> hi all
> 
> i have Cisco 7606-S with IOS c7600s72033-advipservices-mz.122-33.SRD4.bin
> i am trying to rate limit outbound traffic on interface vlan , but no rate
limit or traffic shape command is there ?
> what is the proper solution if applicable
> 		 	   		  
> _______________________________________________
> 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: 7
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 11:38:18 -0500
From: Keegan Holley <keegan.holley at sungard.com>
To: Mohammad Khalil <eng_mssk at hotmail.com>
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] rate limit
Message-ID:
	<AANLkTi=2HNQ-LVfjDafhdTq3AaCdawc9hzJoT+xddFqt at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Mohammad Khalil
<eng_mssk at hotmail.com>wrote:

>
> hi all
>
> i have Cisco 7606-S with IOS c7600s72033-advipservices-mz.122-33.SRD4.bin
> i am trying to rate limit outbound traffic on interface vlan , but no rate
> limit or traffic shape command is there ?
> what is the proper solution if applicable
>
> Those are more or less legacy methods.  They recommend doing everything
with the MQC (Modular QOS CLI).  It's the policy map+policer combination
that the other poster referred to.  This should get you started.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/technologies/tk543/tk545/technologies_white_paper
09186a0080123415.html

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list
cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp

End of cisco-nsp Digest, Vol 96, Issue 98
*****************************************