I am trying to configure ISP failover using IP SLA tracking in Cisco 3900 router(C3900-SPE100/K9).
I want to configure below commands:
R1(config)# ip sla 1
R1(config)# icmp-echo 2.2.2.2 source-interface FastEthernet0/0
R1(config)# timeout 1000
[Code].....
configure IP sla static route tracking in Cisco 3900 series router.
I am looking for the procedure of the router 3900 series failover. I have got two 3900 series router with the same ISO and other interface cards. What are the main things that I should watch ? Does the standby router takes the same ip of active router if the active router fails ? How should I configure it.
View 1 Replies View Relatedi have a cisco router (3900 series) and a add on module (4 x 1 Gig port module). For some reason i cant seem to port channel them and cant do routing (can set an ip address on those ports). I can do port channel and routing on on-board ports. Do i have to enable any commands to do this ?
View 3 Replies View RelatedI would like to configure the policy base routing (PBR) on router (3900) base on the "specific tcp port" (TCP port 16255) to re-direct the traffic to another FE port.
From cisco web portal, CAT 4500 should support PBR as below:"Policies can be based on IP address, port numbers, or protocols. For a simple policy, use any one of these descriptors; for a complicated policy, use all of them." url...
Does 3900 router has the same features on the PBR? if yes, can it support "source tcp port" and/or "destination TCP port"?
how to go about config my bureau connected to HQ and separated by a WAN link of 60mb.
This is my plansplit into halves that is 30 mb for LAN connections, internet and file serving for strictly video streaming, bureaus have routers 2800 conected to HQ HQ has a router 3900
Can the 3900 series router be ordered or upgraded to a license with advances enterprise services? I have a few of these routers and I'm looking to get the license upgraded if possible.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have a question concerning about how many ospf and bgp route entries does 3945E isr g2 router support?
View 6 Replies View RelatedWe have two Cisco 3560E layer 3 switches at the core of our network. The switches are configured as an HSRP pair and the clients on our network point to the HSRP address as their default gateway. So if CORE-A dies, then CORE-B will pick up the address and the default route for the clients will continue to be available.We also need to specify a few static routes on the core switch to allow us to get to specific networks. Is there a way to do this so that the routes failover in the same way that the default gateway does?
View 2 Replies View RelatedWe're in the process of swapping in a new pair of ASA5520s and Catalyst 3750s to support two separate business units. We want Firewall A and Switch A to handle traffic for Org A (VLAN 100). Similarly, firewall B and Switch B should handle traffic for Org B (VLAN200). But we want to be able to fail traffic over in case of firewall or switch failure. Traffic between the two Orgs is being routed at the switch level. [code]
The uplink interface on each switch is currently a routed port with a static address on the uplink subnet. This works fine in a normal state. However, when we fail over one of the firewall contexts to the other chassis, this results in the inability to route internal traffic because the internal interface is now physically connected to a different switch with a different IP port address (obvious in hindsight). The question is, rather than a routed port, what would be the proper way to handle traffic between the switches and firewalls in a failover scenario? If I make the uplink ports into trunks, won't this cause all packets destined for either firewall to hit both both? Seems like that's not the way to go either? [code]
Currently I have a network that looks like this:
ASA5510 - - - Internet - - - ASA5510
| |
EIGRP EIGRP
| |
2821 -----------MPLS----------1841
BGP
The MPLS connection is currently down, I'm trying to run a failover Site-to-Site VPN over the internet. All of the examples I've read have both connections involved in the failover coming out of one device. Since I'm not working that way, what is going to be the best way to failover? Do I need to set up some sort of IP SLA in the config? Or can I somehow weight routes in EIGRP in a way that the connection will failover from Internet to MPLS when the MPLS goes down and vice versa when the MPLS connection comes back up?
Here iis a diagram of my current lab where I am using IP SLA to automatically switch from ISP 1 to ISP 2 should the connection go down (and vice versa)
My switches are C3550 Layer 3 switches. Both ISP's do work so connectivity is not the problem.
If I shutdown the fa0/19 port on SW1 the SLA kicks in and changes my defualt route out 10.0.1.0 without a problem. And when I do a no shut it comes back to tge 192.168.10.0 netowrk just as we would expect. No problem there.
When I disconnect the ISP 1 cell phone the SLA does switch the defualt route to the 10.0.1.0 netowrk. Okay, just fine so far. Here isthe problem, when i reconnect the cell phone the SLA does not come back to the 192.168.10.0 netowrk without first having to delete the SLA and then recresting it (both switches).
I've two Cisco 4500 running as core switches for huge and complex network. The two 4500 are going to act as dhcp server for several subnets. The easiest solution would be to split each DHCP pool in two, and assign the first half of the pool to one of the core switch and the second half of the pool to the second core switch. This would be a partial solution since if one of the two fails, the second core switch would not have enough dhcp leases available for all the devices connected for each subnet.For such a reason, I'm wondering if it the 4500 switches support a stateful redundant DHCP servers, so that the two switches can synchronize their DHCP lease tables. If this feature is available, I could define the same pools for both the switches without the risk of having duplicate ip addresses within the network.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI had a problem with a FWSM of 6500 because the FWSM primary change to standby and after back to active.
View 1 Replies View RelatedIP SLA configuration fails over but cannot ping the 4.2.2.2 via Site B. Here is the output on Cisco 3750...
SW2#show runBuilding configuration...
Current configuration : 2901 bytes!version 12.2no service padservice timestamps debug datetime msecservice timestamps log datetime msecno service password-encryption!hostname SW2!boot-start-markerboot-end-marker!!!!no aaa
[Code].....
Below is a basic image of the HSRP and backup link setup for our LAN.
The virtual IP 192.168.178.50 resides on the primary router and fails over to the backup router. Internal default gateways for the switches are set to 178.50.
Switch1 is Layer3 and has two static default routes configured as:
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.179.50 track 1 - - - (interface line-protocol track)
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.178.50 2
And the primary router has a static route out 179.50 which tracks the interface (route goes down if interface is down), and a backup static route.
ip route (internal LAN) Gi0/1 track 1 - - - (interface line-protocol track)
ip route (internal LAN) Gi0/2 2
Everything works fine. If the primary router fails, Switch1 tears down the route across Vlan179, HSRP fails over the IP to the backup router and routing continues as normal. If the link across Vlan179 fails, the routers tear down the primary routes and again, things continue as normal.
The problem comes when the primary WAN link fails but the router remains up. This means the default route is still across Vlan179. Normally, Id set an IP SLA on Switch1 to track the WAN link BUT Switch1 only has the BASE IOS and the company wont pay for the Advanced IP IOS so I dont have IP SLA as an option.
How can I get the static default route to failover in the event that only the primary WAN link goes down?
Our servers are hosted at the Main site, site office A access to the Main site for Internet and servers. We are thinking NextG to take over when the link between sites goes down.
To start with, what is the configuration for 3750 at Site A and the Main site:
1) Trunking for both switches
2) Routing
3) the automatic failover configuration for the switch at Site A.
I have two Cisco ASA 5510s that I would like to configure in an active passive failover setup. The ASAs are at the top of our rack and handle all our routing. We have been only using one ASA unit with one line from our ISP connected to the WAN/outside interface of the ASA. We recently had our ISP setup two lines into our rack using HSRP. I do not know what equipment they are running upstream of our ASAs but it is HSRP so it should be a set of Cisco routers/switches. Originally I thought I could just connect the 2nd new line to our 2nd ASAs WAN/outside port and setup failover using a crossover cable between the ASAs. After doing this config I had problems accessing some of our IPs in the subnet that the HSRP is part of. If I disconnected the 2nd ASAs WAN/outside line everything was fine. After talking with my ISP they explained that I need to connect both of my lines into our L2 network and then from there into the ASAs. Currently below the ASAs I have two Catalyst 3560-X switches. They are connected together with an ISL trunk and ASA-1s inside network connects to switch-1 and ASA-2 to switch-2. One idea was to connect each of the HSRP lines to each of my current switches and then from the switches to the ASA's WAN/outside interface. Finally back down from the ASA's to the switches via the inside interface that we have currently. This kind of seems messy and a poor choice. The other idea is to get two switches that would sit above the ASAs and connect the HSRP lines to them with the switches connected together. They would then connect to the ASAs. I like this idea better but I don't like having to buy two more full switches for this. These switches would only use a couple of ports and only handle just the HSRP ISP lines to the ASAs. Putting in two more 3560-Xs would be a big waste of money and space for this. So I was thinking of using two Cisco SG200-08, 8 port gigabit basic managed switches for this.
View 5 Replies View RelatedI'm a bit perplexed atm with trying to set up multiple failover routes on a 2821 router. Let me say that I have more experieince in a switched network as routing is seldom required where I work atm. Here's my problem. I have a routing table set up as follows but only the primary routes work. The failover routes will not kick in once the primary route is not there.
ip route 10.32.11.0 255.255.255.0 128.32.8.11
ip route 10.32.11.0 255.255.255.0 128.32.24.11 100
ip route 10.32.12.0 255.255.255.0 128.32.8.12
ip route 10.32.12.0 255.255.255.0 128.32.24.12 100
ip route 10.32.14.0 255.255.255.0 128.32.8.14
ip route 10.32.14.0 255.255.255.0 128.32.24.14 100
Ip addresses are not exact but it gets the point across.
Why the failover routes are not failing over? The failover routes work if I remove the primary route from the config.
Any have experience on triggered failover on VSS deployment with 1 VS-720-10G-3C in each chassis? I tried using "redundancy force-switchover" but after that the 20G VSL is flapping up & down and cannot be up normally, we got 1 FWSM in each chassis, any configuration need to fit in this kind deployment? BTW, if I shutdown the power source of VSS active chassis, both FWSM & VSS can failover normally.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI have run into a problem testing static route failovers using ECMP. I have an edge device (SUT) that has 2 NIC interfaces to an internal Loopback. Each NIC is a unique Gi port on an 7609 VLAN tagged with unique IP subnets. The 7600 is configured to route the loopback via the 2 NIC. I am using CEF in the network for other traffic performance testing. Using an external sniffer we can verify that when a ping is initiated externall to the SUT loopback a specific path is selected by the router.
Ping host ------Network-----7609 Gi1/21 (172.16.110.9)-----------SUT Nic1 (172.16.110.10)
| |
| -------Loopback 137.168.68.114/32
| |
7609 Gi2/21 (172.16.110.73)------------SUT Nic2 (172.16.110.74)
[code]....
Now, when the selected path is taken out of server (pulling cable for example), the 7609 is not clearing the routing table to indicate that particular path is down and failing over to the secondary path. Other things I have noticed is the show ip cef still shows both peers as well as the arp table but the interface shows down (show interface gi1/21 for example). I am running 15.1. My understanding is that since the ports are directly connected to the router, the ports should be detected as down and any association of the IP for the down port should removed. This should trigger the static route to update the static route for the end destination to use the second path and traffic should continue.
ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 12.2(17r)S2, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)BOOTLDR: Cisco IOS Software, c7600s72033_rp Software (c7600s72033_rp-ADVENTERPRISEK9-M), Version 15.1(1)S1, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
One of our customer has 3 ISP Line, out of which Two are Broadband and One is Leased Line. All 3 ISP interfaces are Etherent.
Now, they want Auto Failover with Load balancing among these 3 ISP lines.
Can we do same implementation in Cisco 1941 Router?? What licenses required in router for same?
I have a 6500 serious switch that one port (portfast enabled) hold a server .This server has sort of a Cluster configured for high availability .
During primary server failure the failover server acquires the cluster IP address (ie virtual IP).
Cluster IP 192.168.10.1
Primary server =192.168.10.2 Failover server =192.168.10.3
when failover happen , i am unable to learn arp. need to reboot the server for arp . After reboot i am getting different mac address(secondary) with cluster IP.
query:-normal clustering how mac address generating(means logicaly any mac address will be created or LAN card mac address)? Is ther any issue with portfast configuration(with out portfast configuration TCN will generate and max age timeout decrease 15 second from 300second) ?
Note : we checked a scenario same ip address with two system(ipconflit) and removed arp learned system from network and same thing happen we need to clear the arp manually in L3switch
We have Nexus 5K switches at the aggregation layer and VPC domain has been configured on them. VPC domain includes switches at the access layer as an identity.But when primary switch reboots failover didn,t happened. We are attaching architecture diagram for the setup along with show tech for Nexus 5K both switches.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have two ospf processes running on a single 3570 edge router that has a dedicated transport circuit back to our network core. We are adding an additional "transport" only circuit into a new location that is also apart of the second ospf process backbone which will connect back to our core. There will also be a 3750 for this new circuit termination. Currently we are only redistributing ospf process 2 into ospf process 1 (1 = core backbone).
#router ospf 1
#redistribute ospf 2 subnet
We have no need to have ospf process 1 redistributed into the process 2 tables. That being said, when we add an additional transport ciruit, or path back to our core backbone, will this configuration present any issues with the redistribution process and failover.
I know this is not a the preferred way to do it, but this just an interim network configuration until the Remote Site gets re-located and reconfigured. I'm trying to bridge and route traffic and hoping the community can offer a review of the sample configuration and/or some ideas to make this a reality.
Existing network is bridged across site-to-site private line (p-2-p) so 192.168.100.0/24 devices exist at both locations. In order to reduce bandwidth consumption across the p-2-p, the 172.20.100.0/24 devices (end user PCs and new to the environemnt) will be routed out a local Internet connection which in turn reduces the p-2-p traffic to just private network traffic for the two networks. That same network requires routing through the 192.168.100.0/24 network in order to access the private WAN connected to the 3900 router with IP 192.168.100.1.
I have a two fiber connection from our Central Office(6513) to Remote office (6509). I have a requirement that on the remote office if one of the fiber goes down, the second fiber should work as a failover. I am planning to use SUP720-3B SFP to connect to the CO.
Can I connet one fiber to Sup720-3b G5/1 & another fiber connection to G5/2? or Can I connet one fiber to Sup720-3b G5/1 & another fiber connection to G6/2? I am running EIGRP between sites. Any sample config.
sup-bootflash:s72033-pk9sv-mz.122-18.SXD7b.bin"
Overview Firewall is ASA 5510 running 8.4(9)Core network at Head Office uses OSPFStatic routes on ASA are redistributed into OSPFStatic routes on ASA for VPN are redistributed into OSPF with Metric of 130 so redistributed BGP routes are preferredCore network has a static route of 10.0.0.0/8 to Corporate WAN, which is redistributed into OSPFBranch Office WAN uses BGP - Routes are redistributed into OSPFThe routers at the Branch Office use VRRP for IP redundancy for the local clients default gateway.Primary Branch Office router will pass off VRRP IP to backup router when the WAN interface is downBackup BO router (.253) only contains a default route to internetUnder normal operation, traffic to/from BO uses Local Branch Office WANIf local BO WAN link fails, traffic to/from BO uses IPSec VPN across public internet I'm trying to configure dynamic routing on our network for when a branch office fails over to the IPsec VPN. What I would like to happen (not sure if it's possible) is for the ASA to advertise the subnet at the remote end of the VPN back into OSPF at the Head Office.
I've managed to get this to work using RRI, but for some reason the VPN stays up all the time when we're not in a failover scenario. This causes the ASA to add the remote subnet into it's routing table as a Static route, and not use the route advertised from OSPF from the core network. This prevents clients at the BO from accessing the Internet. If I remove the RRI setting on the VPN, the ASA learns the route to the subnet via the BO WAN - normal operation is resumed.I have configured the metric of the static routes that get redistributed into OSPF by the ASA to be higher than 110. This is so that the routes redistributed by BGP from the BO WAN into OSPF, are preferred. The idea being, that when the WAN link is available again, the routing changes automatically and the site fails back to the BO WAN.
I've got a setup where we have a wireless connection coming in and using mikrotik router. We have multiple stores coming in via the wireless with a dmvpn.
The vpn's terminate on the cisco c870 and can be seen when running: show dmvpn.The cisco has a default route to the fibre router (10.0.0.252). The wireless router is the default gateway for the network. The failover from wireless to adsl fails. (due to the cisco routing traffic back to the wireless router when wireless fails)
If I change the default route on the cisco to dialer1, the failover works, but none of the vpn's connect. The Branches all have dynamic ip addresses. The HO has a static ip.
My goal: I want to achieve adsl failover for when the wireless goes down and still have the vpn's connected.
Can I have some sort of "Dynamic" route on the cisco. So when the vpn traffic comes in via wireless and hits the cisco, the vpn traffic can then go back out that way via the wireless router, but still have a default gateway on the dialer interface for failover?
I have some simple rules on 2 extended lists:ip access-list extended FWINpermit tcp any host 192.36.86.231 eq ftp-data ftp 22 www 443 516 666 671 672 2222permit tcp any host 192.36.86.231 eq 4500 8008 8443permit tcp any host 192.36.86.231 range 5900 5950permit tcp any host 192.36.86.231 range 33434 33550permit tcp any host 192.36.86.241 eq ftp-data ftp 22 www 1935 2195 3306 8888permit tcp any host 192.36.86.241 range 8080 8090permit tcp any host 192.36.86.241 range 33434 33550ip access-list extended FWOUTpermit tcp host 192.36.86.231 any eq ftp-data ftp 22 www 443 516 666 671 672 2222permit tcp host 192.36.86.231 any eq 4500 8008 8443permit tcp host 192.36.86.231 any range 5900 5950,The issue is that 192.36.86.231 can access internet, and 192.36.86.241 can not.Is there a way to troubleshoot 192.36.86.241's connection/packets flow?
View 1 Replies View RelatedWat will be the default memory and hard disk for SM-SRE-710-K9 and wat will be the maximum support for this module.
View 1 Replies View Relatedprovide my some (official) info regarding the MBTF for the C2900 and C3900 routers (2911 and 3945)? This info is currently not part of the data sheets.
View 0 Replies View RelatedOn my 3900 Router my port seen to be shutting themselves off, they are connected antenna.
View 2 Replies View RelatedThe datasheets indicate that the 39xx series ISR G2 routers support AES, but they don't indicate if they handle both AES128 and AES256 in hardware. Via our account manager, we've heard that they only support AES128 in hardware, but not AES256. Given there's no equivalent of an AIM-VPN/SSL-3 module for a 39xx router, this could be a problem for a deployment we're looking at doing.
I can find no document anywhere on cisco.com that confirms that AES256 specifically is supported IN HARDWARE on, say, a 3945E router.
And, if it is supported, are there any performance numbers available for throughput? We're trying to find out if a 3945E is appropriate, or if we need to go with a 7206VXR w/NPE-G2 and VAM2+ module.