|
Reason is we bought them grey market and have no support on them. From a technical standpoint the chassis is fine, but we're seeing some seemingly random problems that spooked us regarding not having support on our equipment. Putting a port mirror on a port to figure out why one device couldn't/seeming wasn't trying to connect to another device on the same subnet resolved the issue, twice. Switch stopped routing all traffic for 10 minutes and had packet loss on switched traffic. Couldn't find any evidence that anything happened other then OSPF going and coming back. Lost a fiber shelf and our vendors can't find the DFC we need to get it back up. Got all sorts of alerts from my applications that seemed to indicate latency/out of order packets that resolved while we all said gently caress it and went to lunch. This was all in the last 2 weeks on two of our core switches. The third has never given us an issue other then a Sup that failed hard and was replaced. Running Sup-720s with 3BCXs and maybe a total of 1-2Gbps of traffic so there shouldn't be any capacity issues. The decision has come down to be between NetIron MLXs or BlackDiamond 12ks. Also got a quote back from Foundry and they gave us a pretty insane discount. [edit] Our traffic is 95% VoIP media.
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2009 17:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:38 |
|
|
Put the chassis under Smartnet, and all modules inside are covered. Shouldn't have any issues doing that to my knowledge.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2009 17:54
|
|
|
gwon posted:I started another thread and got pointed here Most WAAS config is done from the central manager. So a installation basically is plug it in (either inline or with 1 leg for WCCP or layer2 redirect). And run the setup script which sets ip-addresses and tells it to contact the central manager. Basically the box does compression and caching of data going through it. So it it detects data patterns it has seen before it can drop sending it out over the WAN and have the WAAS on the other end of the WAN spit it out to the LAN side. It also acts as a transparent proxy for some protocols reducing problems with high RTT. (mapi, cifs, nfs, http/https) Furthermore the new WAVE applicances also can do some virtualization and run Windows2008 on it, making it possible to have a virtualized print-server, AD, dhcp etc server on the remote site) ior fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Feb 26, 2009 |
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2009 20:10
|
|
|
Just had an interesting problem. I wasn't getting ARP responses on a few devices, switch had entries for the IPs and after clearing entries they would re-populate so ARP seemed to be good from the switch to the device. Tried failing over to the redundant sup and it didn't help. We were able to resolve the issue by kicking over the line cards with 'no power enable.' Very odd. Also with with grey market equipment will the price of smartnet be roughly the cost of a new chassis? If so it's cost prohibitive when I can get a new switch from a competitor for < $75k.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2009 23:21
|
|
|
FatCow posted:Also with with grey market equipment will the price of smartnet be roughly the cost of a new chassis? If so it's cost prohibitive when I can get a new switch from a competitor for < $75k. Not sure, I haven't done it awhile, I'll try to find some quotes or just call up CDW for a baseline quote on it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 26, 2009 23:25
|
|
|
I never had to recertify any grey market equipment when we purchased through our usual smartnet reseller (SBC Datacom), so we just paid the going rate (maybe 5% discount or so) for coverage. Buy shelf spares for anything you need to fix immediately then get yourself some 8x5xNBD smartnet coverage (that's 8x5xNBD on advance replacements, not on TAC access) which'll get you TAC access, code updates and ability to RMA your modules after you swap it out with your shelf spare.
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2009 03:51
|
|
|
FatCow posted:Just had an interesting problem. I wasn't getting ARP responses on a few devices, switch had entries for the IPs and after clearing entries they would re-populate so ARP seemed to be good from the switch to the device. Are you using DFCs on the linecards?
|
|
#
?
Feb 27, 2009 15:18
|
|
|
It seems I can no longer access Software Advisor or Upgrade Planner from my CCO login, can someone tell me what the latest IOS I can run that has SIP capabilities would be?code:edit: nevermind, by just randomly throwing an IOS image at it I've determined I can run anything ever released for 1841s. wolrah fucked around with this message at 07:36 on Feb 28, 2009 |
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2009 06:51
|
|
|
ior posted:Are you using DFCs on the linecards? Not on the ones we had to power cycle to fix.
|
|
#
?
Feb 28, 2009 18:07
|
|
|
wolrah posted:edit: nevermind, by just randomly throwing an IOS image at it I've determined I can run anything ever released for 1841s. Yeah, as you've already discovered, you have a very stock 1841, and it should run any image you can find. If all you're interested in is features, I'd just grab the latest 12.4T.
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2009 01:10
|
|
|
Hopefully this is within the scope of this thread: In my work, a good while back, they were throwing out a lot of old bits and pieces. I managed to grab a few things before they went to the skip. I picked up a 'Cisco Aironet 350 Wireless Lan Adapter'. When I plug it into my laptop at home, though, it won't connect to the internet. It can see my wireless router, but when I try and connect to it I get this error: code:
|
|
#
?
Mar 1, 2009 22:44
|
|
|
Yes, you can use the 350 at home. Other than being an older card, there's nothing really special about it as far as I know. WPA2 might not work however. If that's what you're running on the AP/router at home, that could be the issue. The data sheet mentions WPA but nothing about WPA2. Someone else here might have a better answer for you though. https://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/wireless/ps6442/ps4555/ps448/product_data_sheet09186a0080088828.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2009 03:57
|
|
|
Ah - that must be it. The routers running WPA2 Thanks a lot mate 
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2009 23:34
|
|
|
jwh posted:Yeah, as you've already discovered, you have a very stock 1841, and it should run any image you can find. That's what I ended up doing, I'm running the most loaded out 12.4T Cisco listed, i think advsecurity or something like that. I'm used to 2600s, where I actually have to look at the hardware specs and sometimes play the "flash this and see if I need to recover from rommon" game. Having a box that's specced up enough that I don't have to think is a new experience.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2009 07:00
|
|
|
I need to preface this that I have only really covered basic LAN switching and very basic WAN routing concepts (clearly) and need a wee bit of clarification. I am looking at the following config: code:
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2009 20:55
|
|
|
Yeah it's fine. Frame relay is usually done that way. Different PVCs/DLCIs go on different subinterfaces. The access list on the physical interface is odd.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2009 21:01
|
|
|
Scripting for Routers/Switches. I've never done anything like this before but I was wondering how I would setup a script that I could run from the windows command line, that would connect to a switch and automatically execute some basic configuration. Basically I want to connect to my switch and shutdown or bring up an interface, by just running a simple command. I use VNC to connect to the remote system and when I have that interface operational I've got torrents etc blasting away at full speed which cripples my VNC connection. So ideally I'd like to connect to the remote system run a file called "stop" and it would automatically disable the switch port and that would clear up my bandwidth. Then when I'm done I could run "go" and the port would be reenabled. So what would be the best way to do that?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2009 18:00
|
|
|
Sorry, I don't have anything useful to add to your scripting question, but wouldn't this a perfect test case for QoS?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2009 18:09
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Sorry, I don't have anything useful to add to your scripting question, but wouldn't this a perfect test case for QoS? It sure would, assuming my 851 wasn't software crippled 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2009 19:33
|
|
|
Dang. What OS are you running? I suppose if you're running some sort of Unix-ish environment you could set up an expect script to telnet to and execute commands on the router. If it's Windows though, I'm not too sure Bonne chance!
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2009 19:58
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Dang. What OS are you running? I suppose if you're running some sort of Unix-ish environment you could set up an expect script to telnet to and execute commands on the router. If it's Windows though, I'm not too sure
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2009 20:37
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Scripting for Routers/Switches. Take a look at clogin from RANCID (http://www.shrubbery.net/rancid/)
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2009 21:24
|
|
|
I've been loving with MARS a lot over the last few days and it owns. You can get some really awesome reporting out of the box and it's easy to tune. I'm going to mess with adding custom devices later and see how that goes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2009 23:23
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:Basically I want to connect to my switch and shutdown or bring up an interface, by just running a simple command.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2009 23:59
|
|
|
Here's a strange one I'm scratching my head with. I want to configure one of our 4507s to grab it's time via NTP from an outside time source. From there, I'll configure ntp on all my servers to pull from the 4507. Name resolution is up and working on the 4507. When I enter the following command: 4507<config>#ntp server otc1.psu.edu source vlan 1 I receive the following error: %ERROR: Standby doesn't support this command % Incomplete command. The switch has redundant supervisors, which I think standby is referring to. I can't find the error mentioned on cisco.com or as a plain google search. Anyone have any ideas?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2009 23:07
|
|
|
I don't really know, but is your redundant sup up and online correctly? no IOS mismatch between the active and the standby? Are you trying to configure on the standby directly, or are you getting that message after the primary tries to sync the configuration?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2009 23:09
|
|
|
I'm configuring it via telnet, so it just hits the active supervisor. The error occurs when I put the command in, not when I save the config, which in hindsight would probably mean the standby supervisor doesn't have anything to do with it. Just for the hell of it, I just grabbed the IP for otc1.psu.edu and it allowed me to complete the command. I would think it would be able to resolve that hostname. The error I posted about wouldn't lead me to believe there's a resolution error.
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2009 23:23
|
|
|
Well that's weird, whatever it is. I'm glad the IP works, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2009 02:23
|
|
|
Just as an interesting FYI, the SMARTnet maintenance on a WCS installation licensed for 500 APs is actually more expensive than a four-hour replacement contract on a 6500. And this is for SMARTnet on software only- not even the appliance. Pretty ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2009 22:25
|
|
|
FatCow posted:Reason is we bought them grey market and have no support on them. You can get a chassis for under $800 that is clean and will go back/is already on SMARTnet. I just bought 2 for $400 each (gray) so I'm obviously going the "stock your own parts" route. Smartnet should be just over $3k a year on an '09. The market has crashed on these things. I speced out a 6509 with 2 PS, redundant maxed out SUP2/MSFC2, 2 48 port gige, 2 48 port 10/100 cards in November of last year. It was about $20. I just got that, with a NAM-2, plus a spare chassis and fan tray for $12k 2 weeks ago.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2009 22:44
|
|
|
Crossposting from the cert megathread: I'd like to pick up a router with a FE port and I think the most economical is the 2620. Will I be kicking myself if I opt for the 2620 over the 2620XM? They both seem to have the same 1NM/2WIC slots. As far as I can gather the memory limitation of the non-XM model will prevent me from running 12.4 -- is that something that'll be important come CCNP time or what? My FE requirement is for testing router-on-a-stick fyi. I'll pick up the XM if I can find a good price on one, but I'm in Canada so I'm trying to buy local and avoid border fees/international shipping rates/etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2009 00:19
|
|
|
944 posted:You can get a chassis for under $800 that is clean and will go back/is already on SMARTnet. I just bought 2 for $400 each (gray) so I'm obviously going the "stock your own parts" route. Smartnet should be just over $3k a year on an '09. The market dropped out on the sup2/msfc2 combo since it can't take full tables anymore unless you strip out some /24s or filter on RIR minimums, everyone who takes full tables on sup2/sup32 had to upgrade to the RSP/SUP720 with XL *FCs to continue taking full tables.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2009 00:24
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:Crossposting from the cert megathread: Be aware of the IOS requirements for dot1q fast ethernet subinterfaces. I have a boatload of 2621s that don't have the RAM to support it, and that came as a big and disappointing surprise. XM is a more capable processor and I think they'll take more RAM, overall, but they're still expensive, as you've noticed. As for CCNP, I can't answer that directly, but I think they're testing on 12.4 features now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2009 02:48
|
|
|
jwh posted:Be aware of the IOS requirements for dot1q fast ethernet subinterfaces. I can't for the life of me find any reference to these requirements in Cisco's official 802.1Q documentation unless I'm just missing something. Cisco posted:Platforms Thanks Cisco  The XMs aren't THAT much more expensive, but just pricey enough to the point where you have to make the decision between a third switch or a 12.4 capable router
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2009 03:16
|
|
|
Martytoof posted:I can't for the life of me find any reference to these requirements in Cisco's official 802.1Q documentation unless I'm just missing something. Let me dig around tomorrow, and I'll see if I can't get some more answers for you. Also, have you considered a 3640? They can run 12.4 code, so they're good bang for the buck, despite the higher cost.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2009 03:30
|
|
|
jwh posted:Be aware of the IOS requirements for dot1q fast ethernet subinterfaces. I have a boatload of 2621s that don't have the RAM to support it, and that came as a big and disappointing surprise. XM is a more capable processor and I think they'll take more RAM, overall, but they're still expensive, as you've noticed. For what it's worth, I get my memory from this place. $28 plus 7$ shipping isn't that much of a crusher. It's hopefully the same shipping charge if you grab a few sets. 3rd Party Memory for 2600's I have had no issues using the 3rd party with the 2621's, I use them at homes that have rack's in the basements for dmvpn, they run like a top. I hope you get the same mileage. jwh posted:Also, have you considered a 3640? They can run 12.4 code, so they're good bang for the buck, despite the higher cost. I got one of those from the junk pile. The NVRAM is bad so it has to boot and grab it's config from tftp. Still glad to have it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2009 04:02
|
|
|
ragzilla posted:The market dropped out on the sup2/msfc2 combo since it can't take full tables anymore unless you strip out some /24s or filter on RIR minimums, everyone who takes full tables on sup2/sup32 had to upgrade to the RSP/SUP720 with XL *FCs to continue taking full tables. Absolutely...I agree...but the rest of the stuff is ALSO dirt cheap. I'm only doing stubs, so I can take advantage of the $4k price difference that it would have been with dual 720s. I still think that's ridiculously cheap.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2009 23:22
|
|
|
I have a quick question regarding IOS versions. Where can I find a changelog? Even if it's only one for major revisions say upgrading an ASA from 7.x to 8.x I'd love to see what features were implemented and the like.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2009 03:36
|
|
|
ragzilla posted:The market dropped out on the sup2/msfc2 combo since it can't take full tables anymore unless you strip out some /24s or filter on RIR minimums, everyone who takes full tables on sup2/sup32 had to upgrade to the RSP/SUP720 with XL *FCs to continue taking full tables. The market has dropped out on Sup2 because the things are end of life. SXF is going away soon too. So pretty soon you'll have no SW support. Gray market vendors are trying to shove that poo poo out the door since they don't want to be stuck with them. https://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps708/prod_end-of-life_notice0900aecd800fd91f.html http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps708/eol_c51-500212.html http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps708/prod_end-of-life_notice0900aecd80646c9c.html edit: added links to EoL announcements Tremblay fucked around with this message at 03:51 on Mar 13, 2009 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2009 03:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:38 |
|
|
reborn posted:I have a quick question regarding IOS versions. Where can I find a changelog? Even if it's only one for major revisions say upgrading an ASA from 7.x to 8.x I'd love to see what features were implemented and the like. You want to look at the release notes for the release (and everything back to the release you have a bug in) under the product support section. For the ASA 5500 series it's at: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6120/prod_release_notes_list.html However this will just list the bugid, and a brief description, if you need any more information you'll need to use the bug toolkit which requires a valid CCO login with a support contract.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2009 05:45
|
|