On May 6, 2014 12:32 PM, "Darin" <syn...@live.com> wrote: > > And since those puppies are going to need a reload after adjustment make sure your not exposed to the component decay issue for cards manufactured between 2005-2010 or you could have a interesting night. > > We've hit that issue on three different 7600 chassis. > > Darin >
You are not the only one, major manufacturing defects... http://www.cisco.com/go/memory > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Drew Weaver > > Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2014 10:39 AM > > To: 'nanog@nanog.org' > > Subject: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for 6500/7600 > routers. > > > > Hi all, > > > > I am wondering if maybe we should make some kind of > concerted effort to remind folks about the IPv4 routing table inching closer > and closer to the 512K route mark. > > > > We are at about 94/95% right now of 512K. > > > > For most of us, the 512K route mark is arbitrary but for > a lot of folks who may still be running 6500/7600 or other routers which are by > default configured to crash and burn after 512K routes; it may be a valuable > public service. > > > > Even if you don't have this scenario in your network > today; chances are you connect to someone who connects to someone who connects > to someone (etc...) that does. > > > > In case anyone wants to check on a 6500, you can > run: show platform hardware capacity pfc > and then look under L3 Forwarding Resources. > > > > Just something to think about before it becomes a story > the community talks about for the next decade. > > > > -Drew > > >
