Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
- Cisco Community
- :
- About tnweber01
Stats
Member since
08-30-2015
10
Posts
0
Helpful
0
Solutions
Created by
tnweber01
in Optical Networking
in Optical Networking
12-06-2019
10:54 AM
12-06-2019
10:54 AM
We're considering upgrading our site/branch L3 and fiber distribution switch at numerous sites from models with 1Gb SFP interfaces to Catalyst 9500s with SFP28 interfaces. The access switches in the downstream closets are Catalyst 2960X. Most of the existing fiber plant is multimode OM1 and while we're evaluating replacement, that will be a long-term and expensive process, not lending itself to this round of funding. At some other sites where we've already gone 10Gb I have used SFP-10G-LR-M optics with success along with mode-conditioning cables to get the distances I need. I have also tested SFP-10G-LR-S optics and confirmed I can use them on multimode fiber with mode-conditioning cables, I have not tried pushing the distance to the same extent as the LRM optics but it seems to work in those applications I've tried. I have two questions. First, can the SFP-10/25G-LR-S function with mode-conditioning at 10Gbit with similar characteristics to the SFP-10G-LRS on OM1 cable, and interoperate with the SFP-10G-LRS at the other end of the link? Second, and this is more because I've found conflicting information, does the SFP-10/25G-LR-S operate at 10Gbit speed in a Catalyst 2960X WS-C2960X-48FPD-L and/or WS-C2960X-24PD-L? The main reason for the second question, is that if SFP-10/25G-LR-S will operate in the 2960X at 10Gbit, then I can go with those optics now, and then if/when we upgrade to Catalyst 9K access switches, simply slot them into the new switches. If they don't function in any capacity in the 2960X then I'll have to consider other solutions, and put off purchasing the 10/25 optics until I have the access switches that use them. Thanks.
... View more
Labels:
12-04-2019
01:52 PM
Right now I have about 500 EIGRP routes on the branch router I randomly chose, 89 of which are summarized /16 networks. Those 89 would be a little under 900 if not summarized, so around 1300 routes total if no summarization is employed.
... View more
12-04-2019
12:51 PM
One common network segment, a /24 used for only this express purpose. It's provider-managed L2 MPLS for what it's worth.
... View more
12-04-2019
11:07 AM
I'm evaluating which kind of stub areas would work. It looks like since I only have one ABR for any given additional Area for all but two areas, I could go with a Totally Stubby configuration and let the ABR handle the routing, even for Areas with downstream routers. My guess is that the consultant will have a hand in the DCs, mainly on account of the ISPs. It does amuse me to consider that a Totally Not So Stubby Area might be the best configuration for the DCs.
... View more
12-04-2019
10:57 AM
I suppose I should add, the routers facing the Metro Ethernet WAN are ME3600X. They're upwards of a decade since initial launch, and these will be in-service for the foreseeable future. That's a large part of what's driving my concerns. Additionally it's not a ring topology, it's full-mesh entirely managed by the service provider. If I don't use Areas I'll have more than a hundred routers in the Backbone Area. It's funny, I already sat-for and passed my CCNP SWITCH exam, I was lamenting my lack of OSPF experience and putting-off ROUTE because of that. Looks like that has come to an end.
... View more
12-04-2019
08:09 AM
Depending on what will be approved, based on what you've said for the number of routers in a given Area, I'm leaning towards a solution where the colocated sites are in the area for the site from which they receive service. With this arrangement I'll still have over seventy directly-connected sites in one area, but with the summarization at the ABRs hopefully that won't swamp the routers. It'll still be around 75 routers in Area 0, possibly more if they want the DCs to be in Area 0.
... View more
12-04-2019
06:44 AM
This is an example of what I'm describing. Obviously there are far more service-provider-facing routers than fit on this diagram. I've also made up the numbers, but in a nutshell this looks like what I'm working with. So basically I'm looking at having all of the WAN-facing interfaces in Area 0, the LAN-facing interfaces and possibly the interfaces to colocated sites in new areas, Based on the primary site's Area. So Site 20 as an example, the LAN interfaces would be in Area 20, so I could summarize Area 20's networks with 10.20.0.0/16 into Area 0. Site 23 would have Area 23 on its LAN interfaces. What I'm considering, for a Site like 23, is for the transit networks from Site 23 to Sites 48, 60, and 73 remaining in Area 0, and then putting those sites' LAN-facing interfaces into Areas 48, 60, and 73, again for easy summarization. Alternately all of those sites could be in Area 23, but that would mean configuring summarization for 10.48.0.0/16, 10.60.0.0/16, and 10.73.0.0/16 on Site 23's router, rather than at each local site's router. I'm also tempted to try to have the two DCs set up as Areas 1 and 2, but we'll see.
... View more
12-03-2019
02:35 PM
Greetings. Due to acquisition of devices that does not support EIGRP we're preparing to migrate to OSPF. The topology consists of dozens of sites, each site linked to the service provider's metro ethernet network at L2, all sites directly adjacent to each other as if they're plugged into one gigantic switch. Each site basically has a /16 assigned, carved up with about ten subnets per site. A few sites have further downstream sites colocated, with their own /16, also carved-up into around ten subnets. One branch router exists per site, with no further routers downstream within a site itself. With EIGRP summarization was easy, but with OSPF's summarization only occurring on ABRs it looks like rather than having approximately a hundred routes for the branch sites I'll end up having closer to a thousand. I have labbed setting up branch routers as an ABRs, placing the LAN-facing interfaces (SVIs) into newly-defined Areas, allowing me to summarize the /16 for each branch router into Area 0 on the metro ethernet segment. This is working fine in the lab with having just one router per new area, but obviously this is just a lab, not production. Is this a common or accepted use of Areas and ABRs? I assume having a hundred sites directly adjacent to each other means I should take steps to simplify as much as possible. Thanks.
... View more
Labels:
Created by
tnweber01
in Other Security Subjects
in Other Security Subjects
09-20-2015
11:40 AM
09-20-2015
11:40 AM
I'm playing with routers and serial interfaces in my home lab while studying for an exam. I've got two routers using PPP with CHAP authentication to successfully connect, but having defined the username of the opposite router and the password they have in common I can SSH in to manage the routers with those credentials. I have tried one set of alternate privileges (username otherrouter privilege 0 password password) but that didn't help. Obviously any in-production router that's authenticating to a service provider would have ACLs restricting vty access, but I'd still like to deny usernames that aren't intended for management to be able to ssh or telnet in from the internal side, if it's possible. Sorry for the simpleton question, I've been trying to use print and web resources to find an answer but apparently I don't know how to ask the question right... Any suggestions for further reading on the topic would be appreciated.
... View more
Labels:
Created by
tnweber01
in Optical Networking
12-06-2019
12-06-2019
We're considering upgrading our site/branch L3 and fiber distribution
switch at numerous sites from ...
12-04-2019
Right now I have about 500 EIGRP routes on the branch router I randomly
chose, 89 of which are summa...
12-04-2019
One common network segment, a /24 used for only this express purpose.
It's provider-managed L2 MPLS ...
12-04-2019
I'm evaluating which kind of stub areas would work. It looks like since
I only have one ABR for any ...
12-04-2019
I suppose I should add, the routers facing the Metro Ethernet WAN are
ME3600X. They're upwards of a ...
12-04-2019
Depending on what will be approved, based on what you've said for the
number of routers in a given A...
12-04-2019
This is an example of what I'm describing. Obviously there are far more
service-provider-facing rout...
12-03-2019
Greetings. Due to acquisition of devices that does not support EIGRP
we're preparing to migrate to O...
Created by
tnweber01
in Other Security Subjects
09-20-2015
09-20-2015
I'm playing with routers and serial interfaces in my home lab while
studying for an exam. I've got t...
Public Statistics
| Date Registered | 08-30-2015 11:05 AM |
| Date Last Visited | 12-11-2019 06:45 AM |
| Total Messages Posted | 10 |
