Re: ASR9K question please...not sure if this is OT or not...but

Rob/John/GS, you'll are great. Thanks for input.

Rob, I think I learned recently that some newer switches 4500, perhaps others
default to igmp snoop

Aaron

On Mar 23, 2011, at 5:55 PM, Rob Laidlaw <laidlaw_at_consecro.com> wrote:

> Unfortunately, I have not tested multicast up to that level but I would
assume the hardware can easily forward at that rate. I have tested setups
with several hundred simulated customers each sending varying traffic levels
from 5meg to 1 gig with a mix of multicast and unicast, all sending
concurrently and the box just smiled and kept on going. You may need to turn
on and tweek things like pim/igmp snooping to limit flooding but that is true
for any layer 2 technology.
>
> Although the feature is new to this platform/Cisco, the ethernet services
concept for routers has been around for a long time on other Vendor platforms.
I know that the IPTV services being offered by one of the large national
carriers (extremely heavy multicast use) uses this type of setup for switching
in all of there headed offices.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Aaron <aaron1_at_gvtc.com> wrote:
> Thanks john, have you explored the Ethernet-service thing that Rob
mentioned
> to me earlier ? is that a nice way to do Layer 2 within the ASR ? (rob
sent
> me a link and I need to read-up on it) does it have a full feature layer
> interface capability?
>
> Also, I need to send 2.5 Gbps of mcast through this layer2 group, so I
> wonder if that's gonna have limitations with that much traffic
>
> Aaron
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Neiberger [mailto:jneiberger_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 3:34 PM
> To: Rob Laidlaw
> Cc: Aaron; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: ASR9K question please...not sure if this is OT or not...but
> appreciate anything y'all provide
>
> IOS XR 4.0.1 supports BVI for its bridge groups. I'm still really new
> to ASRs, but they really don't seem to want to do L2 much at all in
> any way similar to Catalyst switches or 7600 routes. It's not as
> simple as creating a VLAN and L3 VLAN interface. You can create a
> bridge group and then assign a BVI to it, but it has some limitations.
> One that I know of is that ACLs are not supported on BVIs.
>
> The ASR9K doesn't seem like a good choice to me if you need a lot of
> L2 stuff. We've been wrestling with similar issues in our test lab on
> our new ASR9Ks.
>
> HTH,
> John
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Rob Laidlaw <laidlaw_at_consecro.com> wrote:
> > I have had to do something similair on the ASR1K series. You have to use
> > the Carrier Ethernet services to create a virtual layer 2 switch. The 9K
> > supports it but you may have to upgrade code if yours doesn't have it.
> Here
> > is the config guide:
> >
> >
>
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/asr9000/software/asr9k_r3.9/lxvpn/co
> nfiguration/guide/lesc39ethi.html
> >
> > Its similar to deploying VPLS in a Service Provider environment, but it
> > works locally too.
> >
> > GL
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Aaron <aaron1_at_gvtc.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I have a SP Video architecture (CATV/VoD/PPV type thing) in place,
> testing,
> >> and operational to some extent using 4506 and 4503 on both ends..
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Digital Content Managers (DCM's) are putting out mcast video.
> >> 239dot..mcast
> >> groups.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Mcast listeners/IGMP joiners, are Video and Audio Edge Modulators and
> >> GQAMs.. (y'all may have heard of some of this SciAtl (Scientific
> Atlanta)
> >> product line, I believe acquired by cisco about 2 years ago)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> .hang in there, I'll get to my networking question.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 4500's are doing EIGRP and PIM-SM to allow for support of the above end
> >> equipment..also, the edge mods and GQAMs are group in vlan's with SVI's
> >> inside the 4500's where I route this subnets, handle igmp joins, etc
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> We are upgrading our 4500's to ASR9K's..9006 on one end and 9010 on the
> >> other end..
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Guess what I found out today..$100K later..the ASR is naturally a
router.
> >> Not able to simply drop it in place of the 4500's as I've stated above,
> the
> >> 4500's are doing L2 and L3 combined. ASR doesn't naturally do that, as
I
> >> now understand it to be like a 2500 (old), or 3660, 7206vxr, 3825, 7513,
> >> etc,etc..you get my point, pure router. Not like 3550,3560,6500,7600.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> What do y'all think about my making the ASR9K's fit into the current
> >> architecture of my existing 4500's by using IRB/bridge groups, and
> routing
> >> the irb interfaces much like I have the vlans and svi's in my current
> >> 4500's? any cautions? This seem ok to y'all?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I'll take any advice I can get
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Aaron
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> p.s. I heard today that IOS XR 4.1 supports IRB
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> p.s.s. I'm new to ASRs, I'm new to IOS XR, I'm not that experienced with
> >> IRB. IRB/CRB was something I messed with about 10 years ago for
> something
> >> I
> >> hardly recall.
> >>
> >>
> >> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> Subscription information may be found at:
> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Wed Mar 23 2011 - 18:20:51 ART