Hello, for mc-lag pair, can one PoA be asr9010 and second PoA 903? ICCP should support this or it will not be stable? Thanks, A. ... View more

Hello, Does anybody know how to configure properly  "bpdu relay" feature between two ME3600 as MPLS PE routers?  Problem is: Both should be configured with  MST and "l2protocol peer stp"  for untagged frames on EFP toward access switches and additionaly thay need xconnect between them (special PW between PE for untagged frames). But problem is they don't see each other this way.Consequence is that access switches doesn't stp block any link toward PEs.  I know I can use "l2protocol forward stp" instead of peer but then PE doesn't consume BPDUs and hence there is no "mac address withdrawal" in case TCN  comes from access network to PE.  Please help, A. ... View more

Hello, I would be most greatefull if anybody knows and can share information if ME3800 or ME3600 support PVST-AG (access gatway) feature? Is there anywhere some configuration guide for that? I know it is supported on ASR9k but ME platforms are of interest to me. Thanks in advance. A. ... View more

Hello, I would be most greatefull if anybody knows and can share information if ME3800 or ME3600 support PVST-AG (access gatway) feature? Is there anywhere some configuration guide for that? I know it is supported on ASR9k but ME platforms are of interest to me. Thanks in advance. A. ... View more

Hello, When EoMPLS packet goes over Etherchannel link than (as I can remember) algorithm for loadbalance hashning uses VC label. So If I have only one VC than only one link will be used (even though this VC transports a huge amount od src and dst IP addresses). Is there a way to configure loadbalancing method to be IP (srcIP,dstIP) for MPLS packets (to force switch not to use MPLS labels for loadbalancing decision, i.e. for 7600, 3750 platforms or it is hardcoded)? Thanks in advance, A. ... View more

Hello,   I have following situation:   Network topology: (7600)PE1----(7600 sup720BXL)P ------ PE2 (ME3600X)   Link (which is not under my administrative domain) stopped transmiting multicast between P and PE2 (unicast works fine, i.e ping etc.). Ofcourse LDP and OSPF went down due to multicast blocking (link PE1-P works ok). I'm waiting for "link provider" to fix the problem but in the meantime I tried few things to enable my MPLS link.   Both solutions didn't work:   (1 solution) I tried to configure "static neighbor OSPF" and "targeted MPLS" (since both of them uses unicast) OSPF  with static neighbors works ok (OSPF is up). MPLS with: mpls ldp neighbor 10.10.10.2 targeted ldp is up.   Targeted session is UP but labels are not ok: on P: show mpls forwading-table "PE2 address": shows "no label" (it should be "pop label") Traffic doesn't flow (due to "no label")   sh mpls forwarding-table 10.10.10.2 Local  Outgoing      Prefix            Bytes Label   Outgoing   Next Hop     Label  Label or VC   or Tunnel Id      Switched      interface               253    no label           10.10.10.2/32     578742   Gi 2/0/1      192.168.100.2   Question: Will this targeted LDP session work if P-PE2 link is not MPLS enabled (pure L3 subnet)? (if P-PE2 have only ipv4 addresess and no "mpls ip" under interface) Is it mandatory for targeted LDP session that all links (path), which targeted session crosses, have MPLS IP enabled?   (2 solution) I tried MPLS over GRE. But this also doesn't work: I configured on link P-PE2(on both sides): interface Tunnel1  desc P-PE2  ip address 192.168.0.2 255.255.255.252  ip ospf cost 1  ip ospf 1 area 0  mpls ip  tunnel source Loopback1  tunnel destination 10.11.11.2   -OSPF is up (with static neighbors) -LDP is up -labels are all fine and as should be (on PE1, P, and PE2) but traffic doesn't flow! I tried on P (7600) to enter  command: "mls mpls tunnel-recir". It didn't help, traffic didn't flow.   Question: This link (P-PE2) is on ES20 card on 7600 (P). For "MPLS over GRE" does it have to be SIP card? Does  "MPLS over GRE" work on ME3600X platform (is it supported)?   Please help if anyone have some other idea how to solve this.   Thanks in advance, A.  ... View more

Hi, I have this situation(generic topology): router1 ---- Cisco7600 ----router2 router 1 communicates with router2 via router Cisco 7600. Normaly all traffic through Cisco 7600 is hardware switched. This Cisco 7600 has sup720 3BXL (IOS 12.2(33)SRE6) and has MPLS PE functionality. Recently I noticed huge increase in CPU utilisation due to interrupts. CPU usage is 50% (only interrupt part). It can be seen that a lot of packets are going to CPU (but also it is only 1% of all traffic going through 7600): show ibc Interface information:         Interface IBC0/0(idb 0x47A73BA8)         Hardware is Mistral IBC (revision 5)         5 minute rx rate 123309000 bits/sec, 32020 packets/sec         5 minute tx rate 124188000 bits/sec, 31856 packets/sec I sniffed/collected packets going to CPU and didn't noticed any "usualy problematic" ones. (i.e. with TTL=1, IP options, broadcast or multicast). further more there is no CEF exception: show mls cef exception status Current IPv4 FIB exception state = FALSE Current IPv6 FIB exception state = FALSE Current MPLS FIB exception state = FALSE significant percentage of all collected packets going to CPU are ( in wireshark noted as): ESP, GRE(PPP), SMB (Microsoft), DCE/RPC(Microsoft). As I can recall ESP (IPSec) or GRE or Netbios should be forwarded in hardware (especially since 7600 just pass through traffic. It is not end point). Has anybody encountered problem like this? I'm concerned because I don't think this packets should go to CPU or I am wrong? (I attached few sniffed representative packets. When I capture/sniff traffic going to CPU for only 1 second, I can found cca 1500 packets of each "attached example") Thanks in advance, A ... View more

Hello, I have 7600 with RSP720-CXL. If I put in linecard with BXL-DFC whole chassis will drop to BXL functionality. But what is the difference? BXL and CXL has equal TCAM. What functionilty could I loose? Regards, A. ... View more