Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Cisco: NSP

ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue

 

 

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All Cisco nsp RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


chip.gwyn at gmail

Jun 4, 2012, 11:40 AM

Post #1 of 26 (3296 views)
Permalink
ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue

Hi all,

Just installed some brand spanking new RSP440's into a couple of
ASR9006's and having a helluva time with the console connection.
Trying to setup the intial root user account and password it seems to
ignore input for a few minutes, then randomly works. After you do
finally get into IOSXR trying to paste anything in through the console
gives some kind of ASCII input error for every character you try
pasting in. My SE had me apply a couple of SMU's but doesn't seem to
help. Looks like XR v4.2.1 dropped today so I'll give that a shot.
Just wondering if anyone else has seen or experienced this. The
console connection works just fine on RSP4G's and a Sup720 and this
happening on multiple RSP400's in multiple chassis.

Thanks all!

--chip

--
Just my $.02, your mileage may vary,  batteries not included, etc....

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


chip.gwyn at gmail

Jun 4, 2012, 1:28 PM

Post #2 of 26 (3221 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

So just to follow up on some things:

Log Messages:
RP/0/RSP1/CPU0:Jun 4 19:20:35.234 : devc-conaux[57]:
%MGBL-RS232-3-FRAMING_ERROR : The UART driver encountered an framing
error for Console port

Console Messages:
Invalid number(-92) sent as ASCII value to command-line process from
VTY/TTY, refreshing prompt.

I've applied asr9k-px-4.2.0.CSCtx89601.tar and /asr9k-px-4.2.0.CSCty98459.tar.

I also noted in the docs, Cisco says to use 8N2 (2 Stop Bits) instead
of 1. Wow, this is the only thing I think I've ever seen that
requires that. Didn't seem to make a difference. I've also played
with flow control on and off.

Also:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/asr9000/hardware/installation/guide/asr9kIGprep.html#wpmkr1101380
Before connecting a terminal to the console port, check the terminal
setting for the data transmission rate, in bits per second (bps). The
terminal transmission rate setting must match the default rate of the
RSP console port, which is 9600 bps. Set the terminal to these
operational values: 9600 bps, 8 data bits, no parity, 2 stop bits
(9600 8N2).

TAC Case pending now...

--chip


On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:40 PM, chip <chip.gwyn [at] gmail> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>  Just installed some brand spanking new RSP440's into a couple of
> ASR9006's and having a helluva time with the console connection.
> Trying to setup the intial root user account and password it seems to
> ignore input for a few minutes, then randomly works.  After you do
> finally get into IOSXR trying to paste anything in through the console
> gives some kind of ASCII input error for every character you try
> pasting in.  My SE had me apply a couple of SMU's but doesn't seem to
> help.  Looks like XR v4.2.1 dropped today so I'll give that a shot.
> Just wondering if anyone else has seen or experienced this.  The
> console connection works just fine on RSP4G's and a Sup720 and this
> happening on multiple RSP400's in multiple chassis.
>
> Thanks all!
>
> --chip
>
> --
> Just my $.02, your mileage may vary,  batteries not included, etc....



--
Just my $.02, your mileage may vary,  batteries not included, etc....

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


jneiberger at gmail

Jun 4, 2012, 1:38 PM

Post #3 of 26 (3371 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:28 PM, chip <chip.gwyn [at] gmail> wrote:
> So just to follow up on some things:
>
> Log Messages:
>  RP/0/RSP1/CPU0:Jun  4 19:20:35.234 : devc-conaux[57]:
> %MGBL-RS232-3-FRAMING_ERROR : The UART driver encountered an framing
> error for Console port
>
> Console Messages:
> Invalid number(-92) sent as ASCII value to command-line process from
> VTY/TTY, refreshing prompt.

I've seen that before when I was pasting in a configuration from a
text file. During editing, somehow the file ended up with invisible
characters that were included when I copied-and-pasted the config into
the router. I had to open it up in a hex editor to see what was
happening. Check any settings you might have in your terminal software
that could be sending characters to the router that it doesn't
understand.

John

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


saku at ytti

Jun 5, 2012, 1:48 AM

Post #4 of 26 (3219 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

On (2012-06-04 14:40 -0400), chip wrote:

> Just installed some brand spanking new RSP440's into a couple of
> ASR9006's and having a helluva time with the console connection.

Any Cisco ERBU/CRBU lurking, you should take page from ISBU playbook, can
copy CPM.

--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


chip.gwyn at gmail

Jun 5, 2012, 7:53 AM

Post #5 of 26 (3241 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

Ok, I could have sworn I tested this but apparently I did not.

According to the docs, I should be using a straight through cable and
a configuration of 8N2 with no flow control at 9600. It's odd that it
worked ok with the RSP4G but not with the RSP440. First time I can
recall ever having to change the stop bits for console on some network
gear. First time I've needed a straight thru cable for a Cisco box in
a loooong time too.

*shrug*

ASR9006 it should be straight thru, 9600, 8N2
ASR9001 it should be straight thru, 115200, 8N1

grumble grumble

Working fine now though, thanks for all the suggestions everyone.

--chip

On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 4:38 PM, John Neiberger <jneiberger [at] gmail> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:28 PM, chip <chip.gwyn [at] gmail> wrote:
>> So just to follow up on some things:
>>
>> Log Messages:
>>  RP/0/RSP1/CPU0:Jun  4 19:20:35.234 : devc-conaux[57]:
>> %MGBL-RS232-3-FRAMING_ERROR : The UART driver encountered an framing
>> error for Console port
>>
>> Console Messages:
>> Invalid number(-92) sent as ASCII value to command-line process from
>> VTY/TTY, refreshing prompt.
>
> I've seen that before when I was pasting in a configuration from a
> text file. During editing, somehow the file ended up with invisible
> characters that were included when I copied-and-pasted the config into
> the router. I had to open it up in a hex editor to see what was
> happening. Check any settings you might have in your terminal software
> that could be sending characters to the router that it doesn't
> understand.
>
> John



--
Just my $.02, your mileage may vary,  batteries not included, etc....

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


saku at ytti

Jun 13, 2012, 12:57 PM

Post #6 of 26 (3152 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

> > Just installed some brand spanking new RSP440's into a couple of
> > ASR9006's and having a helluva time with the console connection.
>
> Any Cisco ERBU/CRBU lurking, you should take page from ISBU playbook, can
> copy CPM.

Just heard that Nexus7k SUP2 does not have CMP. According to Ron Fuller and
Tim Stevenson customers didn't need it.
Here I was hoping we'd finally start getting OOB for routers and switches.

--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


lists at hojmark

Jun 13, 2012, 2:03 PM

Post #7 of 26 (3143 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

> Just heard that Nexus7k SUP2 does not have CMP. According to Ron Fuller
> and Tim Stevenson customers didn't need it. Here I was hoping we'd finally
> start getting OOB for routers and switches.

You still get true OoB management on the N7K Sup2, just not the CMP
interface.

From the top of my head, the only situation where the CMP is useful is when
the CP is dead, but then you most likely will want to reload the sup anyway,
and that can be done from the second sup.

That being said, the CMP can't have added much cost to the sup, so since
there are (corner) use cases where it makes sense, it's still kind of
strange that they've dropped it.

-A

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


nick at foobar

Jun 13, 2012, 2:23 PM

Post #8 of 26 (3094 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

On 13/06/2012 20:57, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Just heard that Nexus7k SUP2 does not have CMP. According to Ron Fuller and
> Tim Stevenson customers didn't need it.
> Here I was hoping we'd finally start getting OOB for routers and switches.

This is a Real Switch for Real Operators. If you want proper OOB, go out
and buy yourself some crappy €800 server with iDRAC, ILO or RSA, any of
which will give you full remote console access, power cycle control and
comprehensive management software.

Real Operators don't need proper OOB. They drive to lights-out facilities
at 02:00 in the morning and praise their vendors at loud volume for
providing them with the opportunity for showing off their operational
machismo by hitting a power switch in person.

Man up, Saku.

Nick
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


saku at ytti

Jun 13, 2012, 11:03 PM

Post #9 of 26 (3128 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

On (2012-06-13 23:03 +0200), Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists wrote:

> You still get true OoB management on the N7K Sup2, just not the CMP
> interface.

Ask your servers guys if RS232 fate-sharing main OS is OOB. They've gotten
this right for over decade.

> That being said, the CMP can't have added much cost to the sup, so since
> there are (corner) use cases where it makes sense, it's still kind of
> strange that they've dropped it.

No. Considering Intel mobo with proper OOB costs like <80EUR.

On CMP you can upload images, on on-band RS232 you cannot (most don't even
support anymore and even those which do it's not practical, as it takes
less time time go on-site, short of moon nazis Internet, and while they pay
well, we thought it was unethical to provide connectivity).
On CMP you can build cheap OOB network (eth switches cost nothing compared
to proper RS232 server like Avocent)
CMP has better latency, much nicer to work over than RS232

Who has not ever had problem with Cisco or Juniper where RS232 has been
dead? Maybe it was pilot error (image deleted, box reloaded), maybe it was
software defect hard crashing it or reloading in loop. Maybe it was simply
newly istalled box delivered without image.

I'd say kill the on-band RS232 and roll CMP only.
--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


p.mayers at imperial

Jun 14, 2012, 12:17 AM

Post #10 of 26 (3096 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

On 06/13/2012 08:57 PM, Saku Ytti wrote:

> Just heard that Nexus7k SUP2 does not have CMP. According to Ron Fuller and
> Tim Stevenson customers didn't need it.

Sigh. Talk about a retrograde step. I really like the CMP.
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


tim at pelican

Jun 14, 2012, 4:53 AM

Post #11 of 26 (3083 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

> Real Operators don't need proper OOB. They drive to lights-out facilities
> at 02:00 in the morning and praise their vendors at loud volume for
> providing them with the opportunity for showing off their operational
> machismo by hitting a power switch in person.

Or to install remote power bars and console servers *once* per rack, and have *one* scriptable interface regardless of how many different types of equipment you connect to it. Not for every case, but sometimes rolling my own OOB makes more sense than paying the vendor extra to provide me with another different one.

Regards,
Tim.
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


saku at ytti

Jun 14, 2012, 5:13 AM

Post #12 of 26 (3085 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

On (2012-06-14 12:53 +0100), Tim Franklin wrote:

> Or to install remote power bars and console servers *once* per rack, and have *one* scriptable interface regardless of how many different types of equipment you connect to it. Not for every case, but sometimes rolling my own OOB makes more sense than paying the vendor extra to provide me with another different one.

Avocent to on-band RS232 compared to switch to out-of-band ethernet are
equally homogeneous. You connect to them in standard way (true out-of-band
ssh, telnet) once you are connected, you're on your own in both cases,
interface is heterogeneous

Sure for power-cycle you can do it same way for each system. But we're not
arguing managed power supply versus CMP. We're arguing on-band RS232 versus
out-of-band ethernet.

--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


nick at foobar

Jun 14, 2012, 5:19 AM

Post #13 of 26 (3082 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

On 14/06/2012 12:53, Tim Franklin wrote:
> Or to install remote power bars and console servers *once* per rack, and
> have *one* scriptable interface regardless of how many different types
> of equipment you connect to it. Not for every case, but sometimes
> rolling my own OOB makes more sense than paying the vendor extra to
> provide me with another different one.

On a more serious note, I do this too. However, I don't have fully
remotely controlled PDUs in all my racks; nor does RS232 fulfil all my
requirements.

So, yes, I view it as a problem that I can get a cheapo server costing €800
with really good OOB control, but I can't get decent OOB control of my
networking kit costing 100x that.

Nick
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


gert at greenie

Jun 14, 2012, 5:52 AM

Post #14 of 26 (3083 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

Hi,

On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 01:19:59PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> So, yes, I view it as a problem that I can get a cheapo server costing ?800
> with really good OOB control, but I can't get decent OOB control of my
> networking kit costing 100x that.

You don't get a decent CPU with the networking kit either, so what...

gert

--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany gert [at] greenie
fax: +49-89-35655025 gert [at] net


saku at ytti

Jun 14, 2012, 6:19 AM

Post #15 of 26 (3085 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

On (2012-06-14 14:52 +0200), Gert Doering wrote:

> You don't get a decent CPU with the networking kit either, so what...

What is decent? To me RE-S-1800X4-16G-S and A9K-RSP440-XX qualify as decent
CPU.
PQ3 OTOH, does not qualify as decent. And QorIQ neither, but I'm happy that
vendors are moving from PQ3 to QorIQ.

--
++ytti
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


robhass at gmail

Jun 14, 2012, 12:56 PM

Post #16 of 26 (3095 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

> Or to install remote power bars and console servers *once* per rack, and have *one* scriptable interface regardless of how many different types of equipment you connect to it.  Not for every case, but sometimes rolling my own OOB makes more sense than paying the vendor extra to provide me with another different one.

Power Bars are OK but not for this devices which eats a lot of power.
6000W PS will eat full power bar. And what about power bars for DC
PS'es... Again power bar can also broke what we had for our APCs
couple of time.

CMP on Nexus7k-Sup1 and Sup2T was wonderful feature.

Rob

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


benny+usenet at amorsen

Jun 15, 2012, 4:16 AM

Post #17 of 26 (3119 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

Saku Ytti <saku [at] ytti> writes:

> On CMP you can upload images, on on-band RS232 you cannot (most don't even
> support anymore and even those which do it's not practical, as it takes
> less time time go on-site, short of moon nazis Internet, and while they pay
> well, we thought it was unethical to provide connectivity).
> On CMP you can build cheap OOB network (eth switches cost nothing compared
> to proper RS232 server like Avocent)

You are so completely right. In addition, servers can be power cycled
remotely through CMP if need be, whereas routers need an expensive
managed PDU and you always have the risk that someone got the wiring or
the documentation wrong and you hit the wrong box.

Similar problems with the serial wiring/documentation of course, but at
least you generally discover the problem before you do anything bad.

In addition, properly implemented CMP interfaces provide a certain
amount of defence against attacks on the management network, because a
configuration mistake can never link production and management -- for
that you need a vulnerability in the CMP.

IMHO no switch or router should have management access enabled on an
interface which can be configured to pass non-management traffic.

> I'd say kill the on-band RS232 and roll CMP only.

Absolutely. RS232 is not quite useless, but it is far from a proper OOB
management solution.

Do the Cisco servers have proper OOB management? If so, can they send a
few people from the various other business units on a field trip to the
server guys?


/Benny

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


jpv at veldersjes

Jun 15, 2012, 11:16 AM

Post #18 of 26 (3067 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

On Fri, 15 Jun 2012, Benny Amorsen wrote:
> Do the Cisco servers have proper OOB management? If so, can they send a
> few people from the various other business units on a field trip to the
> server guys?

I think they have: Cloud Services Router 1000v...

I do wonder if that's just the Nexus 1000v with all the Procket code...

Kind regards,
JP Velders
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


lukasz at bromirski

Jun 15, 2012, 11:19 AM

Post #19 of 26 (3033 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

While I'm sure you're right and I fully concur with the separate
CMP being an option, a couple of feedback and observations I've
gathered from some time spent as a Cisco filed sales guy:

On 6/15/12 1:16 PM, Benny Amorsen wrote:

> IMHO no switch or router should have management access enabled on an
> interface which can be configured to pass non-management traffic.

Some customers actually dropped Cisco offering and went with the
competition, when they've learnt, that the management traffic is for
MANAGEMENT only. It can't pass the user traffic.

I saw customer dropping our 4900M after learning the FE0 management
can't be used to route it's default route to the internet for the
rest of multi-10GE customers. "True story" as they say. No amount
of education at this point can make him change his mind.

You'll hit customers saying it's needed, and those saying it's
forbidden.

> Absolutely. RS232 is not quite useless, but it is far from a proper OOB
> management solution.

Again, the same story. "We won't ditch our console servers!" is very
often confronted with the "Only proper OOB is Ethernet OOB!". Hard
to judge if you're trying to sell to everyone :)

Somebody said it costs 80$ to add CMP CPU, and it's not that simple.
While the cost of the part itself propably is even cheaper, when you
add additional PCB space, connections, heating requirements,
enviromental requirements, MTBF numbers and so on, you end up with
the cost of the board higher. LJ Wobker spoken recently at NANOG,
and while his talk was more about power dillemas of modern router
architectures, it's worth to note the reality.

But don't get me wrong - I'm for the true CMPs on the RP boards,
be it a combo of RS+Ethernet.

> Do the Cisco servers have proper OOB management? If so, can they send a
> few people from the various other business units on a field trip to the
> server guys?

Truth is, a lot of wisdom is shared between BU, trust me. Simply
speaking, feedback we receive from various customers usually doesn't
add up to a single, best-of-the-breed solution. Sometimes the
requirements can't be fulfilled at the same time.

Some of you don't see a need for separate CMP. Some of you do. It's
a matter of talking to your account team, and as somewhat noted on
this list already a number of times (Mark? Gert?) you need to vote
with your money.

--
"There's no sense in being precise when | £ukasz Bromirski
you don't know what you're talking | jid:lbromirski [at] jabber
about." John von Neumann | http://lukasz.bromirski.net
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


sthaug at nethelp

Jun 15, 2012, 12:13 PM

Post #20 of 26 (3035 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

> > IMHO no switch or router should have management access enabled on an
> > interface which can be configured to pass non-management traffic.
>
> Some customers actually dropped Cisco offering and went with the
> competition, when they've learnt, that the management traffic is for
> MANAGEMENT only. It can't pass the user traffic.
>
> I saw customer dropping our 4900M after learning the FE0 management
> can't be used to route it's default route to the internet for the
> rest of multi-10GE customers. "True story" as they say. No amount
> of education at this point can make him change his mind.

It may be interesting to compare with Juniper which has had an Ethernet
port from day 1 for management traffic only - and still does today for
the M/MX/T series. They seem to have survived.

And yes, I'm firmly in the camp of wanting this type of functionality.

Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug [at] nethelp
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


nick at foobar

Jun 15, 2012, 12:51 PM

Post #21 of 26 (3016 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

On 15/06/2012 19:19, Åukasz Bromirski wrote:
> Somebody said it costs 80$ to add CMP CPU

No, saku said that server oob was an €80 optional extra. I think we all
realise that there's going to be a difference in cost between a pci-x
plugin card on a mass-produced server board, and a custom-made unit for
systems with much smaller distribution. Having said that, CMP was a good
idea and a step in the right direction. Real shame it's been canned as a
general proposition for cisco chassis boxes.

Nick
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


nick at foobar

Jun 15, 2012, 1:13 PM

Post #22 of 26 (3018 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

On 15/06/2012 19:16, JP Velders wrote:
> I think they have: Cloud Services Router 1000v...
> I do wonder if that's just the Nexus 1000v with all the Procket code...

no, it's a virtualised asr1k software image - i.e. it runs XE not NX/OS.

Very confusing that ASR1k and ASR9k share virtually nothing except the
name, but that the CSR1v is the same software as the ASR1k (but in no way
related to the CRS1, argh).

Someone please send the naming police to Cisco product management and tell
them to start making arrests.

Nick

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


lists at hojmark

Jun 15, 2012, 1:19 PM

Post #23 of 26 (3019 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

> I think they have: Cloud Services Router 1000v...
>
> I do wonder if that's just the Nexus 1000v with all the Procket code...

No, it's IOS XE as a VM.

-A

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


sthaug at nethelp

Jun 15, 2012, 1:27 PM

Post #24 of 26 (3063 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

> > I think they have: Cloud Services Router 1000v...
> > I do wonder if that's just the Nexus 1000v with all the Procket code...
>
> no, it's a virtualised asr1k software image - i.e. it runs XE not NX/OS.
>
> Very confusing that ASR1k and ASR9k share virtually nothing except the
> name, but that the CSR1v is the same software as the ASR1k (but in no way
> related to the CRS1, argh).

Ah, you mean somewhat like 3550 vs 3560 (nothing in common except
being a switch), or 7301 vs 7304?

> Someone please send the naming police to Cisco product management and tell
> them to start making arrests.

They've been at the 'maximally confuse your customers' a *long* time.

Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug [at] nethelp
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


benny+usenet at amorsen

Jun 15, 2012, 2:46 PM

Post #25 of 26 (3012 views)
Permalink
Re: ASR9000/RSP440 Console Issue [In reply to]

Åukasz Bromirski <lukasz [at] bromirski> writes:

> I saw customer dropping our 4900M after learning the FE0 management
> can't be used to route it's default route to the internet for the
> rest of multi-10GE customers. "True story" as they say. No amount
> of education at this point can make him change his mind.
>
> You'll hit customers saying it's needed, and those saying it's
> forbidden.

Yes, you can't win either way.

> Again, the same story. "We won't ditch our console servers!" is very
> often confronted with the "Only proper OOB is Ethernet OOB!". Hard
> to judge if you're trying to sell to everyone :)

The server people generally left the serial console port on the servers
though.


/Benny


_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All Cisco nsp RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.