Ok I didn't setup my OSPF on my 7010. Today I found out that any static route I put into my 7010 gets sent into to my MPLS network. My 6509's you have to "Tag" the static rout for this to happen. Was under the impression the same was necessary for the 7010 or at least it had to "match" an access list. How can I fix the below so that by default all static routes are not resdistributed into OSPF?
I'm currently working on a plan to migrate our 6500's over to our new 7010's. At the time of the migration I want to tighten up our OSPF design and configure OSPF for "passive-interface default" then allow only those interfaces that should have OSPF neighbors to send the hellos. The issue is that the command is not showing up under the OSPF process. What's even more interesting is that the Nexus 5.x Unicast Routing Configuration Guide shows that the "passive-interface default" command should be an option to enter.
I'm currently running version 5.1(4) (though looking to upgrade to 5.2 during my migration testing). I would rather configure the passive-interface via the routing process versus having to enter it on every interface.
I'm looking to redistribute static routes in to OSPF on a Nexus 7k. To do this I'll be using a route-map with a match statement. My question is can you match routes using an ACL, a prefic-list or both. The reason that I ask is that in some docs I've read it states the following:
IP access lists—(For policy-based routing only). Match based on source or destination IP address, protocol, or QoS parameters. This tends to indicate that you can't use IP access lists for the match criteria for redistribution.
I have an environment where i have two nexus 7010 switches, along with 2 nexus 5510's. I need to run OSPF as a layer 3 routing protocol between the vpc peer links. I have 1 link being used as a keep alive link, and 3 other links being used as a VpC link.
1) Is it best to configure a separate Vpc VLAN i.e 1010
2) Is it best to configure a vrf context keep-alive
3) just have the management address as the peer ip's.
I am working on Nexus 7010 with NX-OS 5.1.5. I have to delete the static route 10.10.0.0/16 via 10.16.0.21. [code] I try to remove the route with the command "no ip route 10.10.0.0/16 10.16.0.21" and I have the message below % Route not deleted, it does not exist..I don't understand why I have this message because the static route exist.
I am having a problem reaching a soho linksys e1000 router through a second hop cisco 2900 router.Here is a brief topology of the network: I am using OSPF area 100 for all networks except for
192.168.2.0 on R1 to E1000 which is RIPv2 R1 directly connects to R2 with a point-to-point serial on network 192.168.12.0 /30 with ip 192.168.1.13 R1 directly connects to a a switchport using network 192.168.2.0 /24 with ip 192.168.1.75 R3 directly connects to a switchport using network 192.168.1.128.0 /25 with ip 192.168.1.129 R3 directly connects to a different cisco router using ethernet on network 192.168.1.0 with ip 192.168.1.1 E1000 directly connects to a switchport using network 192.168.2.0 /24 with ip 192.168.2.1
The switch has a vlan ip on 192.168.1.128 /25?I can ping from R1 to E1000?I can ping from R3 to R1 192.168.2.75? I can't ping from R3 to E1000 192.168.2.1?show ip route on R2 indicates that network 192.168.2.0 is reachable via the serial connection on 192.168.1.12?I have redistributed rip to ospf area 100 and OSPF to RIP on R1?I am wondering why R1 can reach E1000 on network 192.168.2.0, and why R3 can reach R1s 192.168.2.0 newtork, but R3 can't reach the E1000.There is an R2 router than can reach R1 and also cannot reach E1000, but I assume it's for the same reasons R3 can't, so I've omitted the remainder of that topology for this question.
I 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 have 2 ASBR routers, AGFR01RTR03 and AGFR02RTR03, performing OSPF to OSPF redistribution in both ways for the same ***. They also do summarization for our private addressing scheme. It is all working just fine for that part (neighbors, summarization, redistribution).
Let's focus on AGDC01RTR01 with a specific entry here (IP subnet is fake) :
Routing entry for 184.108.40.206/25 Known via "ospf 1000", distance 110, metric 300, type inter area Last update from 10.2.244.76 on GigabitEthernet5/1, 1d03h ago Routing Descriptor Blocks: * 10.2.244.76, from 10.2.1.249, 1d03h ago, via GigabitEthernet5/1 Route metric is 300, traffic share count is 1
Is there a known bug for Nexus 7K version 6.0(4) related to route redistribution?I have few vlan interfaces and being redistributed to the BGP.vlan interfaces are all up ang pingable.After configuring redistribution, vlan route is not in the bgp table.sho ip bgp is saying "path invalid"
BGP routing table entry for 10.165.101.192/28, version 26302 Paths: (3 available, best #3) Flags: (0x180c0021) on new-list, is not in urib, need resync with RIB, exported, has label vpn: version 47719, (0x100002) on xmit-list local label: 492294
I'd like to use IP SLAs and object tracking to define static routes for specific source/destination traffic across some WAN links we have. I've done this in IOS and it's worked fantastically, but I've not found where/how to do this on the Nexus 7010 platform (or any Nexus platform) as of yet. I could have sworn that this was going to be introduced in the 6.x code? Below is an example of how we do this in the IOS world:
track 11 ip sla 1 reachability delay down 15 up 15 ip sla 1
Esentially this gives us the option of using a "failover" default route. I've attached a basic diagram to explain what we are trying to do with IP SLAs and object checking. The tracking should be configured against an SLA that uses icmp and the static routes should be configured against the tracking.
In our LAN network design, we have two Nexus 7010 switches on the core connected via vPC. Then LAN access switches are directly connected to the Core Nexus switches via regular port channels on the 3750's and vPC on Nexus. The core Nexus switches will be linked to an existing LAN network and the applications will be progressively migrated from the old to the new network.In this scenario, three VDCs are planned to be configured on the Nexus - One for the Interconnect (and WAN at a later stage), one for the LAN/local services and one for the building facilities/local services.
We recently replaced our core switch from a non-cisco vendor with a Nexus 7010. With our old core switch, I had the ability to log changes to the ARP table. So if there was a dhcp conflict or a vMotion event, it would show up in the "show log" output. I've not found a way to do that with the Nexus switch - or at least no way to view the log. I have the command: logging level arp 6
I've got two Nexus 7010's running HSRP north bound to a pair of ASA's, and BGP south bound to four 6509's. Is it possible to advertise default route to BGP neighbor (or prefer it via MED), only if the node is HSRP-active?
Essentially the goal is to create symmetry for inbound/outbound traffic. Only way I can think of so far is via an EEM script, so that when it sees HSRP go active via syslog, it would kick off an action to remove ASN prepend, or reduce MED, and the opposite if HSRP goes standby.
I have to upgrade a Nexus 7010 with dual Sup engines from 4.2(4) to 5.2 and am hoping it could be an ISSU. We are fine with an outage window.To upgrade from 4.2(4) to 5.2(5) I'll have to do a multi hop upgrade from 4.2(4) - 4.2(6) - 5.2(5) and each hop would take 40-60 minutes.do I spend 40-60 minutes for each hop, or just do a disruptive upgrade straight from 4.2(4) to 5.2(5)? Like I said, we are fine with an outage window.
I just deployed a nexus 7010 switch at a server farm. after deployment, it was notices that there are surges in latency across the network. The default gateway was then moved to the nexus, with this pinging from an host on the same subnet there is intermitent burst is latency
NEXUS>>>>>Server Ping of about 80ms and sometimes even times out. To me, this is strange. NX-OS Version is 5-02a
I'm looking to see if it is possible to run a vPC between to vDC's on a single 7010? We have a Production setup that runs dual 7010's with vPC's between the chassis but in our lab we only have a single 7010 with a 32 port 10gig module. I was thinking that maybe we could create 4 vDC's on the 7010 and run a vPC between the vDC's.
We will install a new Supervisor Engine in our Nexus 7010.One Supervisor Engine is already installed an 1Year old.So the Problem is that both Supervisor Engines may have different NX-OS version.Could this lead to a problem?Does the installed Supervisor Engine "udate" the newer Supervisor engine?
We have a couple of Nexus 7010's split into Core and Distribution VDCs. MGMT0 interfaces on each of the Nexus VDC's (including the Admin VDC) are configured with different IP address, but on the same subnet i.e 10.10.10.1/24 for admin, 10.10.10.2/24 for Core and 10.10.10.3/24 for Distribution. The MGMT 0 physical port on each Nexus is connected to a physical gig port on a 3750 X switch, and the 3750X has uplinks back to the Nexus configured for vPC.
When i ssh to the VDC MGMT0 IPs from the 3750X, i can access each of these VDCs without any problems. But if i enable routing on each of these links(OSPF) and advertise it to the WAN, i cannot see these routes advertised and also cannot see any of these routes in the local routing table.Just wondering if i have to enable these links on a VLAN and then advertise it to the WAN..But if this the case, VLANs cannot be created on the Admin(default VDC).
We have, for nearly 4 years, used EIGRP on our 6513 to make use of two unequal links to our branch offices. This worked because we could use the variance command and cause EIGRP to insert two routes into the table, one from each carrier. Thus it was we could balance the load to each one with a ratio similar to the ratio of the bandwidth of Link A to Link B.
We just purchased 2 Nexus 7010's to replace our single 6513 core.After much consternation we have found from our Ciscio SE that the Nexus 6.0.2 software rendition of EIGRP does not support variance.
Why would Cisco take their own propriatary protocol and then gut it by removing features? I'm quite ready to send these Nexus boxes back in favor of a newer 6500 series. MEC doesn't work like it is supposed to and the show-tech runs for over 24 hours without ever finishing (and this we can repeat on both boxes, multiple times).
We've opened a tac case but I just wondered for any work around for the 'variance' command?
I am facing issue with nexus 7010 login authentication by radius server. I have two nexus 7010, one of them is working perfectly. Other taking long time to authenticate. If i use local database to login it works perfectly. It works fine also if i login from console using radius for authentication.
Does the nexus 7010 support virtual switching yet? All of the posts I have found from about a year ago say that it is going to be supported, but there were no dates listed. I heard the same thing from Cisco a while back, but haven't followed up with it.If it is supported finally are there any configuration guides available for it?
you find attached my network architecture with 2 Nexus 7010 on core layer and 2 Nexus 5020 on distribution layer, each one with 1 N2148T fabric extender switch. PC-A1 and PC-A2 are connected to one N2148T, PC-B1 is connected to the other N2148T. Nexus-7000-1 is HSRP Active for all VLANs, Nexus-7000-2 is HSRP standby. PC-A1 and PC-A2 are connected to VLAN A, PC-B1 is connected to VLAN B. PC-A1 and PC-A2 have the same default gateway correspondent to IP HSRP on VLAN A. It happens that PC-A1 is able to ping PC-B1 while PC-A2 is unable to ping PC-B1. If I issue a traceroute from PC-A2 I see Nexus-7000-2’s physical IP address as the first hop even if Nexus-7000-2 is HSRP standby. After the first hop the traceroute is lost. If I shutdown Port-channel 20 on Nexus-5000-2, PC-A2 starts to ping PC-B1.I can’t understand what’s wrong in this architecture.
I use Nexus 7010 as our layer 3 router.I have ssh feature turned on so I can manage it from the management interface. I just found out that users can use putty to ssh to the local SVI interface of the NEXUS. Although they still need username and password to login but we dont want them even able to bring up the welcome screen.Example, user's IP is : 172.16.25.100 , they can ssh to 172.16.25.1 which is the NX SVI interface.
I believe i've enable jumbo frames on our Nexus 7010, one in each data-centre.
system jumbomtu 9216. Also on the interfaces mtu 9216. And can see MTU 9216 bytes, BW 20000000 Kbit, DLY 10 usec on the port-channel between them. Though when i ping between vlans at each site with large packets i get 30% drops and if i set the DF bit in IP header to yes - 100% loss.
8798 bytes from 10.200.12.2: icmp_seq=19 ttl=254 time=8.024 ms --- 10.200.12.2 ping statistics ---20 packets transmitted, 14 packets received, 30.00% packet loss
I have a senario where i'm going to have 2 Nexus 7010 connected as a core, and i'm going to have 4 5510's connected in a star formation. Each nexus 5510 will connect to the nexus core Via two 10Gb links. Each nexus 5510 will have 2 links attached to The core switches in vPc's.
I've got a pair of Nexus 7010's running vPC. I am having a Multicast issue with a cluster of Linux servers that need to talk Multicast for cluster/high-availability operation. All the servers need to talk to a single multicast address and I am having trouble getting them to communicate. I believe I need to enable IP IGMP Snooping Querier on the N7K's and it needs to be enabled on the VLAN where the servers reside. How to enable IP IGMP Snooping Querier on a VLAN ?