nanog mailing list archives
Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509.
From: Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:23:11 +0100
Peter, This question would be better directed at cisco-nsp, but... On 21/08/2009 11:39, Peter George wrote:
I have several Catalyst 6500 (Supervisor 32) aggregation switches with WS-X6148A-GE-TX and WS-X6148-GE-TX line cards. These line cards do not support storm-control/broadcast suppression. This impacted us badly during a recent spanning tree event.
Not surprised. The 61xx cards are not service provider suitable line cards and they have proved this very clearly. Sorry to hear about these storms - they really are devastating, aren't they? But if you're running L2 customer facing services, particularly shared L2 domain access, there are two things you care about: storm control and port security (mac address counting). The 61xx cards don't do storm control.
For example, is it possible to rate-limit broadcast/multicast, STP and ARP on a per VLAN basis? If so, how?
Yes, you replace your 61xx cards with 67xx cards. You can't do this sort of thing with qos or copp.
Nick
Current thread:
- Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509. Peter George (Aug 21)
- Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509. Nick Hilliard (Aug 21)
- Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509. Roland Dobbins (Aug 21)
- Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509. Jack Bates (Aug 21)
- Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509. Nick Hilliard (Aug 21)
- Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509. Roland Dobbins (Aug 21)
- Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509. Nick Hilliard (Aug 21)
- Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509. Roland Dobbins (Aug 21)
- Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509. Sean Donelan (Aug 22)
- Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509. Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 22)
- Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509. Nick Hilliard (Aug 21)
- Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509. Nick Hilliard (Aug 22)