Cisco :: Core Switch 6509 - Route Each Vlan To Exit From Spacific DSL
Jan 26, 2012
i'm already has one internet connection is connecting directly to the Core Switch 6509,Vlan 500 (1921.168.1.0) and the Switch is route any internet request with default route:
SW6509-conf)# ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.170.10.10
10.170.10.10 is --> Next hop for the DSL router internal IP, and it's working fine.
The Problem: We have a new internet connection with new Vlan 600 (172.16.1.0) another ISP/ with another DSL router, so i need your kindly support and suggest how to connect both of them to exit from the Core Switch 6509. is it ok if i make another default route to the Next hop to the new DSL router as:
SW6509-conf)# ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.80.10.10
10.80.10.10 is --> Next hop for the new DSL router internal IP.
is there any way like default route , route-map or any other features to :
route Vlan 500 (192.168.1.0) to exit from DSL 1 --> 10.170.10.10
route Vlan 600 (172.16.1.0) to exit from DSL 2 --> 10.80.10.10
I need to create a DMZ Vlan. Core switch is a 6509. FW is an ASA5520. Need to create a VLAN for DMZ purposes for outside facing servers. NAT is used on ASA.
I want my core switch auto failover to other route if the primary route is link down it will go to the secondary route
example ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1 ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 2.2.2.2 100
if my core switch detect next-hop 1.1.1.1 it will re-route and go to the 2.2.2.2 for the next-hop my core switch using static route and cant support ip sla
I am getting following error in Cisco 6509 switch.BUt there is no impact in the switch.
: %MAC_MOVE-SP-4-NOTIF: Host 0000.0c07.ac01 in vlan 694 is flapping between port Te8/1 and port Te7/1 29:33.959: %MAC_MOVE-SP-4-NOTIF: Host 0000.0c07.ac01 in vlan 269 is flapping between port Te7/1 and port Te8/1
i'm already has one internet connection is conecting directily to the Core Switch 6509, and the Switch is route any internet request with default route:
SW6509-conf)# ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.170.10.10
10.170.10.10 is --> Next hop for the DSL router internal IP, and it's working fine.
We have a new internet connection with another ISP/ with another DSL router, how to connect both of them to exit from the Core Switch 6509.
is it ok if i make another default route to the Next hop to the new DSL router as:
SW6509-conf)# ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.80.10.10
10.80.10.10 is --> Next hop for the new DSL router internal IP.
We have a L3 core switch with multiple VLANs setup. Is there a way to place an IPS so as to monitor the traffic passing between, lets say, VLANS 1-3 and VLANs 4-10?
I am planning to upgrade the current core switch(3750) to 6509 series switch. Since we have a production network running we have to plan for an online core switch upgrade.
I have a L3 core switch with multiple VLANs setup. Is there a way to place an IPS so as to monitor the traffic passing between, lets say, VLANS 1-3 and VLANs 4-10?
I have some specific traffic that I am attempting to pull off of VLAN 310 at the router, apply a route-map that sends this specific traffic back down to the switch on VLAN 55 (and the private address) and once it hits the switch apply a route-map on that VLAN 55 interface directing the same traffic over to the 72.x.x.9 address which goes through a FAP box back up to the router on another interface.
I have attached the config information, I know this isnt the best practice way to do this however right now this is how I have to do this.When runing a trace from the net traffic stops at .2 and when running a trace from my test /30 it stops at .2 as well. I am not sure what to do at this point
My core switch is a 6509-e and my IDF closets have 3750's.I have a couple of vlans currently setup, that can communicate with each other.VTP is setup Client/Server where as my core is Server, all IDF's are Client.
What i'm trying to do is create an isolated VLAN. I want to setup a DHCP scope and use helper address. When i plug in a client to that VLAN, i want it to get an IP, but not have any other network access.
Is this possible to do without switching to Transparent mode? If not - what reprocussions will i see by switching to transparent mode?
I am getting very slow window file transfer speed (4 Mbps per second) between two connecting servers in Cisco 6509 switch. I have connect the two laptops in 6509 switch in same module using the same vlan and try to copy the files from one laptop to another and vice versa and got the same speed on 4 to 5 Mbps per second. Switch utilization is not more than 10% and both the laptops are connected in 1 Gbps full duplex.
I have checked by removing the gateway in both laptop but the output is same.
I have a Cisco 6509 with IOS "s222-ipservicesk9_wan-mz.122-18.SXF16.bin"I need to enable dot1x on user's ports on the switch. each user is connected to the switch through the IP phone.
I just found out that I can not enabled dot1x on trunk port. I have tried to use "switchport voice vlan " but I got:
One of the pur client want to use Cisco 6509 as core Router. STM Module they want to install in it and used as Core Routing through it. Is it ok with core network ?
We have a 6509 core with the below modules running for a long time and the utilization used to be always 10 to 13 percent checking with the supplier it was told to us that due to the firewall modue we have and its normal Now 2 days back i noticed the utilzation had jumped to 90 % and now it happened again
I see that on runnung proc cpu
16407 56.1% 56.5% 55.9% ios-base
16430 35.3% 35.2% 33.9% iprouting.iosproc
the modules present
Mod Ports Card Type Model Serial No.--- ----- -------------------------------------- ------------------ ----------- 1 6 Firewall Module WS-SVC-FWM-1 SAD140901XA 3 16 16 port 1000mb GBIC ethernet
We just replaced our ancient 6509 dedicated SAN switch with a Nexus 5548UP (with 4 2248 FEXs).Our old SAN 6509 was completely separated from the Core 6509, and that Core 6509 doubled as a Datacenter switch. We've now segmented the "Datacenter" and "Core." The SAN and servers are connected to the Nexus gear rather than the Core. The old SAN had only 3 vlans. One for SAN data (Vlan16), one for management interfaces (Vlan250), and one for switch management (Vlan15).
As part of my cleanup, I want to get rid of that Vlan15 and use vlan250 for switch management. In another building, we have a 3750 that provides SAN (Vlan16) and management (Vlan250) connectivity to a single Equallogic box and a Dell PowerVault tape drive for backup purpose. That 3750 is the only device that still has an address on Vlan15 (other than the core). Refer to the drawing below.
The Core 6509 is the gateway for Vlan250 and Vlan15. I have created an interface for Vlan250 on the 3750. ACLs exist on vty connections of each switch allowing telnet access ONLY from the Mgmt 2960. There are no ACLs on the Vlans themselves.From the Mgmt 2960, I can telnet to the 3750 using either its Vlan250 IP address or its Vlan15 IP address. However, if I shut down Interface Vlan15 on the Core 6509, I can no longer telnet to the 3750, not even using its Vlan250 IP address.
The connection times out. If I attempt to telnet to the 3750 via Vlan250 from the Core 6509, I get connection refused (which I should get due to the ACL on the vty connections). I can still telnet to other devices on Vlan250 (such as the management interfaces on the Nexus 5Ks). Why am I able to telnet to the 3750's Vlan250 Interface only when the Core's Vlan15 Interface is Up?
we are using cisco 6509 series switches as core switches. and Cisco 4510,4507 series switches as edge switches. all the vlans are created at core switches and propogating to edge switches through VTP. we are using OSPF as routing protocol at core switch for internal routing. till now we are using 4510,4507 switches as layer 2 switches. Since, 4510 & 4507 switches are hign end swithces i want use them as layer 3 switches instead of layer 2.if i change these switches from layer 2 to layer 3 does it make any impact on our network or better to keep them as layer 2 switches.if i change these switches to layer 3 is there any advantage i will have.
but on interface gi 1/0/1 i want to have data from vlan 10 tagged as VLAN 20. At this time i have solved this issue very primitively
I have set up gi 1/0/2 as int mode acces, acces vlan 20 and i have connected gi 1/0/2 with gi 1/0/3 with eth cable. int gi 1/0/3 is switchpor mode acces, switchport acces vlan 10
I m planning to implement VSS in core but want some inputs on IOS as i have FWSM as a service module Core :- Ii am running 12.2(33)SXH2a on my Core 6509 and i checkd cisco sites and Fwsm release notes but it states only I-Train of IOS while mine is H-Train so can I directly upgrade to I-Train or I was thinking of SXH8b IOS.
I have a Netgear GSM7248R switch with 5 different Vlans including th management Vlan. Each of the vlans are connected to my layer 3 switch for routing. I want to access the management vlan form any of my Vlans so my layer two switch can be detected by my snmp manager.
I've been given the task to clean-up our network config, and have walked into a disaster zone.We have a 4510R on site with everyone using the default VLAN, VLAN 1.I have created 4 new VLANS, VLAN100, VLAN150, VLAN200, VLAN250 I have assigned interface addresses to each VLAN and configured Inter VLAN routing.I can route to and from each new vlan with no problem, i.e VLAN250>VLAN100 VlAN100>VLAN200 etc but I can't route to VLAN 1(Default VLAN) from any of them, I can ping the interface on VLAN 1 from any VLAN , but any hosts are unreachable. On the flip side , from VLAN 1 I can route to all of the VLANS.
We have 6509 VSS with FWSM Module and we have created two context on it, one is INTERNALL CONTEXT othe is EXTERNALL Context? We have spanned various VLANS in switches and FWSM context level. All VLAN Gateways are configured in context level.
Activity description : We had planned migration of these devices into a new Datacenter, it was a planned activity. During migration of devices from one Dc to a new DC we broke the VSS and kept the primary running and removed the secondary switch and migrated this secondary to new DC and powered this device ON in the new DC and checked all the config was very much fine but this device was OFF network as secondary was brought to new DC just to limit the downtime during the primary switch movement.
During the activity ( Primary switch movement )We powered off the Primary switch and mean time before shifting into new Data center We had brought up secondary switch which was already existing in the DC was put live in the network and it was working fine without any issues.
Later we had moved Primary into new data center and tried to put into VSS with the secondary , during this period the secondary device into went into RECOVERY MODE and primary device was not responding and devices went off network and immediatly we removed the VSL link and brought up primary into production network without secondary online in the network ( Without VSS just stand alone switch ) network started working, but bringing up the primary we found that some of the VLANS in the FWSM was deleted and some VLAN had misconfiguration ( example : say original VLAN ip 10.200.112.1 has become 10.300.13.1 ) also some of the access list as well as SVI was deleted making configuration mismatch.
Wanted to know while syncronization b/n primary and secondary switch in VSS if we pull out VSL link would create this type of issues.
I have FSWM active/standby installed in 6509-E core switches running following FWSM Firewall Version 3.1(3) Device Manager Version 5.0(2)F..I want to upgrade to latest FWSM version as well as ASDM, I downloaded asdm-622f.bin and c6svc-fwm-k9.4-1-5.bin from cisco portal. When i checked the show version of FWSM, it says..The Running Activation Key is not valid, using default settings: Running Activation Key: 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000 0x00000000
I have gone through threads on CSC about how to upgrade FWSM in failover mode, now my concern is, Do i have to take care about activation key or keep as it is ? I have maintenance contract with cisco for all devices.
connecting a 5548 pair to our core 6509s. Just want to be sure we don't introduce any issues into the network.The 6509's are connected and perform all the routing. Essentially, we're moving away from a 3750 stack in the data center and the 5548s are the replacement. We'd want to limit the vlans to the specific server network vlans. Our current setup is a port channel between the 3750 and each of the 2 6509s for redundancy. I'd like to use the same functionality when we connect the 5548's but I'm looking for what the config should look like to ensure no spanning tree loops are introduced and that it is configured optimally.
If I have two stackable switches were only one stackable switch has two uplinks one uplink goes to one core 6509 switch and the other uplink goes to the other 6509 core switch can a Layer 3 etherchannel be used if each uplink go to a different core switch, by the way hsrp is running between both switches and also can you give an example how data will be routed from the stackable switch through the ethernetchannel to one of the core switch accross the WAN to another core switch?
I have an MPLS router that connects to the core network.This router distributes (per route maps) routes from OSPF into BGP and from BGP into OSPF.The OSPF Process conencts a 6509 to the 7206 MPLS router. There are some routes in the OSPF process that I have filtered out of the 6509. They do not show up inthe 6509 at all and this is the only way they can be getting into the 7206.Checking the 6509 database, this route is gone, but it stays in the 7206 until I clear the route manually. The result is the route still gets distributed into MPLS. [code]
One thing to note, there are two possible OSPF paths the route gets into OSPF, one of them, the route is filtered with distribute-list on the 6509, which means it is still in the database, so it is still in the 7206 database, and still get distributed into BGP on the 7206, correct?
In my Company there is a core Switch 4500 series , to which in the 1st module servers are connected and in the second module 2960 , 3750 series Switches are connected, problem is that the Utilization of Core switch is very high and the core gets hanged. the configuration of the senerio is VTP domain i.e core is Server and the rest are Clients....