[c-nsp] The Family of ASR902 - ASR903 - ASR907

Tue Oct 27 23:52:44 EDT 2015

Hi James,
I was not aware of the issue which you mentioned regarding 6PE. I am hoping this problem will go away with Application Engineered Routing a.k.a Segment Routing since you will be able to build IPv6 LSP without using 6PE.

Best Regards,

[http://www.cisco.com/web/europe/images/email/signature/horizontal06.jpg]

Waris Sagheer
Technical Marketing Manager
Service Provider Routing Segment
waris at cisco.com<mailto:waris at cisco.com>
Phone: +1 408 853 6682
Mobile: +1 408 835 1389

CCIE - 19901

<http://www.cisco.com/>

This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message.

For corporate legal information go to:http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html

From: "cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net>" <cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net>> on behalf of James Jun <james at towardex.com<mailto:james at towardex.com>>
Date: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 3:22 PM
To: Aaron <aaron1 at gvtc.com<mailto:aaron1 at gvtc.com>>
Cc: "cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>" <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] The Family of ASR902 - ASR903 - ASR907

It seems quite scalable and seems to have a nice path to higher density
ethernet with the RSP3 supporting (8) 10 gig, (2) 40 gig and (1) 100 gig

Yea, the 10G port density is pretty awesome with RSP3.  100Gig IMA requires CPAK though.

What do y'all know about this 902,903,907 ?   I want it for my
distribution/aggregation of L2 and L3, vpls (manual and bgp ad), vpnv4 and
future vpnv6.

Right now, we roll 903, 902 and 920s for simple L2 Metro-E backhaul, nothing fancy
and it works really well for us.  We also use it for VPLS and no problem there either.

The only caveat we ran into is lack of hash options for LACP/port-channels.  Not really
easy to load-balance if a subscriber has LACP'd bundle into one of these.  There is no
support for 5-tuple hash, nor MPLS label hash like on Cat65/68k Sup2T or ASR 9k series on
bundles; you only get src-dst IP/mac.

Lastly, (it's not really ASR 90x problem) it uses IOS XE, which means if you are
running 6PE and have ASR 90x in the label switching path, it will reply to IPv6
traceroute with FFFF::ipv4, instead of using IPv6 address you have configured in
the transiting interfaces on the box.  We typically configure IPv6 interface on core
interfaces, even if we're running 6PE and have no IPv6 routing protocols in the core.
On IOS XR, NXOS and JUNOS, P routers in the path will always pick the configured
interface IPv6 address to respond to v6 traceroute; IOS XE and Classic will always
pick FFFF::ipv4 and it's quite annoying as it breaks traceroute on several operating
systems (i.e. FreeBSD) that conform to RFC which does not permit FFFF:: from the wire.

Best,
james
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/