Re: cam timer tuning

While I love Arista, theirs is a very niche market... Even they say so
themselves :-)

--
Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Joseph L. Brunner
<joe_at_affirmedsystems.com> wrote:
> Dude do yourself a favor and switch to Arista.
>
>
>
> Itbs a great product with great people behind it.
>
>
>
> I would say without breaking any NDAbs 60% of all US Equities, Futures and
> options trade on Arista driven networks. 20% of the rest of the volume moves
> over Juniper EX series. Cisco, Extreme, BNT and all the others have the
> crumbs.
>
>
>
> Arista is used in many sophisticated networks and its rock solid.
>
>
>
> -Joe
>
>
>
>
>
> From: me you [mailto:anunda19_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 12:29 AM
> To: Carlos G Mendioroz
> Cc: Marko Milivojevic; Joseph L. Brunner; Naufal Jamal;
> ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
>
>
> Subject: Re: cam timer tuning
>
>
>
> All I know is the 4948's suck. Give me a 3750 any day, I have been told that
> the 4948's are better becasue they do IPv6 software instead of in hardward
> like 3750. But I don't know for sure I would love to see someone with some
> documentation on that.  but I see all kinds of problems with the 4948's. if
> you change a intergrated motherboard with NIC on an end device you have to
> clear ARP, but not with a 3750. Heard the 4948E are better, but from the
> text that was provided it looked like a 4948E because the "media" command
> was not provided for for the G1/49. In Fact the whole topology looks like
> the same B/S being pushed by my company. if it is you know me
>
>
>
> Rob
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar>
> wrote:
>
> Hmm, go back to the first (rather cryptic) message:
>
>
>
> whenever we bring up a new
> trunk link between Nexus 7K and 4948 we see unicast flooding caused due to
> TCN's.
>
>
>
> So in this particular case, we (well, he) knows that a TC has happened,
> and that it causes the flooding...
>
> -Carlos
>
> Marko Milivojevic @ 28/12/2012 19:48 -0300 dixit:
>
>
>
> TC and event correlation are not cause and effect. The issue is that a
> host went down and someone was still transmitting to it. And can do so
> for 4 more hours :-)
>
> --
> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
> Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
>
> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar>
> wrote:
>
> That won't cut this, because the event happens *when there is a TC*.
> No way you will get ARP down to 15 seconds or so.
> Nah, identify your silent destinations and ping them from the DG :)
>
> -Carlos
>
> Marko Milivojevic @ 28/12/2012 15:38 -0300 dixit:
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Joseph L. Brunner
> <joe_at_affirmedsystems.com> wrote:
>
>
> You should unify all timers at 600 seconds.
>
> That number is usually good to me.
>
>
>
> It's hard to change ARp timers in the entire domain. I was thinking
> more along the lines of dramatically increasing the aging timers in
> CAM tables to match the ARP :-)
>
> --
> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
> Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos G Mendioroz  <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar>  LW7 EQI  Argentina
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos G Mendioroz  <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar>  LW7 EQI  Argentina
>
>
> 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