09-12-2012 03:06 AM
Dear ASR9000 experts,
If using 2 x ASR9001 with the Cluster technology (starting on the 4.3.0) can we assume that we can achieve processor redundancy ? For instance, if the active RP on the ASR9001 #1 fails can we assume that the standby RP on the ASR9001 #2 will assume the job in hands and that LC on the #1 and #2 chassis will continue forwarding NSR style ?
Thanks !
Solved! Go to Solution.
09-12-2012 03:11 AM
I would assume this as well
As it is not ready yet, we don't know the full story and if there are any caviat.
Regards,
/A
09-12-2012 03:11 AM
I would assume this as well
As it is not ready yet, we don't know the full story and if there are any caviat.
Regards,
/A
09-13-2012 08:48 AM
Thanks Alexei. When can we have absolutely sureness about it ? Only when 4.3.0 is released for the iron man ?
09-13-2012 01:31 PM
Aha, you know its code name, so you should have other information sources
But yes, the probability is high, but you never know.
Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPad App
09-14-2012 08:01 AM
Thanks Alexei ! Of course i have other sources .. but you guys are my favourite !
09-24-2012 09:10 AM
Hello All,
Is it needed to buy any optics for the EOBC Links ? Or the built-in ports has all that is needed for the connection ?
Thanks!
09-25-2012 11:47 AM
SFPs would be needed to purchase separately.
Regards,
/A
01-07-2013 04:17 AM
Hello Alexei,
Have you more insight information to answer my initial post ?
"
If using 2 x ASR9001 with the Cluster technology (starting on the 4.3.0) can we assume that we can achieve processor redundancy ? For instance, if the active RP on the ASR9001 #1 fails can we assume that the standby RP on the ASR9001 #2 will assume the job in hands and that LC on the #1 and #2 chassis will continue forwarding NSR style ?
"
Thanks!
01-07-2013 04:54 AM
Almost correct. We have primary and backup DSC but we don’t have chassis standby RP.
the standby RP on the ASR9001 #2 will take over, but ASR #2 manages LCs in chassis #1 via RSP in chassis #1, so if the first chassis fails due to RSP failure and we switch to the second chassis, we loose all the links on chassis 1.
if we switch due to a process crash for example and we don’t really have an RSP failure, then yes, RSP on the chassis 2 will take over with NSR and will manage both racks.
Regards,
/A
03-05-2013 08:20 PM
Hello Alexei, could you tell me what kind of SFP need for the Cluster Ports?
I ca use this one?
SFP-10G-SR=
What about the Inter Rack Links for these setup between the ASR9001?
Thanks
Gerard
03-08-2013 06:48 AM
Hello Gerard,
No, this SPF is not good for EOBC. only 1G is supported.
any data 10G port can be configured as IRL link.
Regards,
/A
03-12-2013 07:50 AM
My 10G LR SFP+'s work fine on the cluster links so i guess it IS 10Gig capable.
01-06-2014 08:22 AM
Hi Alexei,
From my testing with XR 4.3.0 clustering on ASR9001 I drove the same conclusion: only 10G SFP+ was working for EOBC. What is the explanation? Does Giga SFP also work?
Thanks, kind regards
Edi
Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPhone App
01-06-2014 08:32 AM
10G EOBC is NOT supported and NOT needed, the BW requirements for EOBC are very low. The optics may work and they may not, I have seen the same optics work in one chassis on 4.3.0 and not in another on 4.3.0.
Please see https://supportforums.cisco.com/docs/DOC-34114 for the list of optics which have been tested and are confirmed to work for EOBC.
Thanks,
Sam
01-06-2014 08:44 AM
Hi Sam,
Thank you for your reply. I'm aware of the doc but it doen't fully apply to ASR9001.
I'll test SFP-GE-L as EOBC SFP and let you know the result.
Thanks, kind regards,
Edi
Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPhone App
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: