[116835] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nick Hilliard)
Fri Aug 21 11:23:39 2009
X-Envelope-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:23:11 +0100
From: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
To: Peter George <Peter.George@lumison.net>
In-Reply-To: <B5F945E48C137C49A98BC86DD35939C012DFA2D012@nbg01-exch-01.entlstaff.domain.lumison.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Peter,
This question would be better directed at cisco-nsp, but...
On 21/08/2009 11:39, Peter George wrote:
> I have several Catalyst 6500 (Supervisor 32) aggregation switches with
> WS-X6148A-GE-TX and WS-X6148-GE-TX line cards.
>
> These line cards do not support storm-control/broadcast suppression.
> This impacted us badly during a recent spanning tree event.
Not surprised. The 61xx cards are not service provider suitable line cards
and they have proved this very clearly. Sorry to hear about these storms -
they really are devastating, aren't they? But if you're running L2
customer facing services, particularly shared L2 domain access, there are
two things you care about: storm control and port security (mac address
counting). The 61xx cards don't do storm control.
> For example, is it possible to rate-limit broadcast/multicast, STP and
> ARP on a per VLAN basis? If so, how?
Yes, you replace your 61xx cards with 67xx cards. You can't do this sort
of thing with qos or copp.
Nick
