7600 SSC-400 / SSC-600 Design Limitation

Hello,
I want to know if there is any way we can overcome the restrictions on these cards, resulting in reload when an SSO happens on a Catalyst 6500 switch.
Is there any new or upcoming model of SSC cards which will be SSO aware ?
Restrictions:
>VSPA state information is not maintained between the active and standby supervisor engine during normal operation. During a supervisor engine switchover in an SSO environment, the VSPA will reboot.
>The Cisco 7600 SSC-400 is not Route Processor Redundancy Plus (RPR+) or Stateful Switchover (SSO) aware. As a result, the Cisco 7600 SSC-400 will reset if RPR+ or SSO is configured.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/interfaces_modules/shared_port_adapters/configuration/7600series/76ovwvpn.html#wp1108766
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/interfaces_modules/services_modules/vspa/configuration/guide/ivmovw.html#wp1051863
Regards,
Akhtar

Hello,
You will need both. The 7600-SSC-400 is the carrier module of the SPA-IPSec-2G.
There is more information on this via the following link:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/interfaces_modules/shared_port_adapters/configuration/6500series/76ovwvpn.html
Warm Regards,
Rose

Similar Messages

(Linecard image not present) at WS-SSC-600 and 7600-SIP-400

i install two modules WS-SSC-600 and 7600-SIP-400 in slot 5 and 6 in 13-slot chassis and give this output from show power (Linecard image not present)
for both cards.
supervisor engine is : VS-S720-10G with sub-module VS-F6K-PFC3CXL and VS-F6K-MSFC3
IOS : s72033-advipservicesk9-mz.122-33.SXI9
what that mean and how to fix it ?

Ok problem solved by upgrade ios to another version but the new image must contains (_wan) in image name for example (
s72033-advipservicesk9_wan-mz.122-33.SXJ6 ) otherwise the two modules will not powered up.

VPN service module choice 7600-SSC-400 vs. SPA-IPSEC-2G

Need to decide between the two VPN service module: 7600-SSC-400 and SPA-IPSEC-2G for a 6509 sup 720 3bxl. Not sure what is the difference and couldnt find too much info just searching the internet. What would be the benefits of one or another?

Hello,
You will need both. The 7600-SSC-400 is the carrier module of the SPA-IPSec-2G.
There is more information on this via the following link:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/interfaces_modules/shared_port_adapters/configuration/6500series/76ovwvpn.html
Warm Regards,
Rose

Problem with installing new line card 7600-SSC-400

Hi all,
I have a trouble when trying to install new line card 7600-SSC-400 on Cisco 6509. Here was the message displays on the screen after I finished installing the line card : "%C6KPWR-SP-4-UNSUPPORTED: unsupported module in slot 7, power not allowed: The image for the card is not bundled in image." I tried to install this line card on another slot, but it doesn't work. The attched item is logfile which I saved in the installing session. I don't know what I hvae to do now, please help me to resolve this problem !
Thanks so much,
Hieu

Hi Hieu,
You might want to run the following to see more detail of the error:
show diagnostic result module all detail
And I would also suggest that you reseat the 7600-SSC-400 line card firmly back to the switch, and check the status again.
If it's still showing the error, maybe you can try seating the module on a different slot, and check if you have the same issue.
If the issue still persist after reseating and testing it on different slot, then it might be a hardware issue, and you might want to open a TAC case to further investigate it.
Hope that helps.

SSC-400 / SSC-600 / IPsec SPA resets during SSO

Hello,
I want to know if there is any way we can overcome the restrictions on these cards, resulting in reload when an SSO happens on a Catalyst 6500 switch.
Restrictions:
>VSPA state information is not maintained between the active and standby supervisor engine during normal operation. During a supervisor engine switchover in an SSO environment, the VSPA will reboot.
>The Cisco 7600 SSC-400 is not Route Processor Redundancy Plus (RPR+) or Stateful Switchover (SSO) aware. As a result, the Cisco 7600 SSC-400 will reset if RPR+ or SSO is configured.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/interfaces_modules/shared_port_adapters/configuration/7600series/76ovwvpn.html#wp1108766
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/interfaces_modules/services_modules/vspa/configuration/guide/ivmovw.html#wp1051863
Regards,
Akhtar

Hi Sung,
Have you load the appropiate FPD image into the flash? Please find the following document for more info:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst6500/ios/12.2SX/release/notes/ol_14271.html#wp2430389
HTH,
jerry

Design Limitation On ALL Santa Rosa MacBook Pros, 2.2 and 2.4 GHz

While searching the Internet for answers to my new $2500.00 MBP headphone (output jack) has audible hissing sounds I found several posts on Macrumors.com and macintouch.com to explain the design Limitation/Problem. To summarize:
The Problem
The issue has three components, as described in this MacinTouch Report:
- A low hiss that is constant whenever the audio circuitry is on
- Static that occurs whenever anything is playing... even something quiet.
- A series of high-pitched noises that occur somewhat randomly. The best comparison I've seen is that it's like listening to those hearing tests where you raise your hand when you hear a tone.
The problem only occurs with low-impedance headphones (more on this below).
Some Facts
- The problem occurs on ALL Santa Rosa MacBook Pros, 2.2 and 2.4 GHz. It is a design flaw on Apple's part, and returning your machine for a new one will not help. There are plenty of people who say they can't hear the noise, but those people either have high-impedance headphones or speakers, or just don't have very good hearing.
- Only Santa Rosa MacBook Pros seem to be affected by this particular static problem. I've seen some reports of other machines having audio issues, but they are always different.
- The 'Audio Update 2007-001' that Apple released about two weeks ago doesn't fix it. It does fix a popping problem on all Intel Macs (including the SR MBPs), so it's worth installing, but that is a different problem than this one.
- It does seem to be an Apple-specific problem; I've been unable to find any other reports of non-Apple Santa Rosa notebooks having the same problem.
Just wondering if anyone else has had this issue with their new MBP?
Thanks,
B

I experience the issue as well both in OS X and when I'm in Windows Vista.
Whenever a program uses audio, there is an annoying high-pitched hissing noise from the built-in speakers.
Of course the severity of the problem depends on the individual hearing ability, but everyone I have asked, have been able to hear the noise.
Apple is known to be the first choice of audio professionals; however this problem is below that standard.

Can we use SPA-4XOC3-POS-V2 on 7600-SIP-400

Hi,
We have ordered 2 x SPA-4XOC3-POS to use on 7604, we have received SPA-4XOC3-POS-V2 from our supplier.
I know that the SPA-4XOC3-POS-V2 are for the 12000, is there a way to use them on a 7600-SIP-400??
Any help is appreciated.
Thank you.
Hitch

This SPA is not supported on SIP-400 on 7600s. You need to get a NON V2 SPA.
Atif

PPPoE Cisco 6500 + 7600-SIP-400

Hello,
we use a lot of Cisco 6500 switches across our network. I bought one 7600-SIP-400 with one SPA-5X1GE-V2 module.
Unfortunatelly I have found that there is no command support for PPPoE in my IOS version 12.2 SXI13.
Can somebody tell me which IOS version do I have to use to get command support for PPPoE Server?
Thank you.
Milan

"Doesn't have to be a Cisco box. "
If you're still interested in solving this (or haven't already), you can mail me at [email protected]
Cheers,
Anton

Port Analizer Port gigabit cisco 7600 SIP-400 SPA-5X1GE-V2

Hi,
I have a Wan LINK (Layer 3), so I want to check if there are retransmissions in this link.
Do you know if there is a way that a can do SPAN on a GigabitEthernet Port on SPA-5X1GE-V2 (Cisco 7600 Platform)
I tried but i got this error:
R(config)#monitor session 10 source int GigabitEthernet 4/0/0
% Interface(s) Gi4/0/0 not supported as monitor source(s) on this platform
Cisco IOS Software, c7600rsp72043_rp Software (c7600rsp72043_rp-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 15.1(2)S, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
Technical Support: http://www.cisco.com/techsupport
Copyright (c) 1986-2011 by Cisco Systems, Inc.
4    0 4-subslot SPA Interface Processor-400 7600-SIP-400
5    2 Route Switch Processor 720 (Active)    RSP720-3CXL-GE
4/0 5xGE SPA                    SPA-5X1GE-V2
thanks for the Help.

Hi,
Does anyone have any suggestions?

Report designer limits

I have some problems inserting queries into the report designer.
It seems only queries containing only key figures in the columns can be added as data provider.
If I have a characteristic in the columns I get a message: "Report Designer does not support this query drilldown. Do you really want to delete this section ? and at least one Characteristic in Rows!". (I also have characteristics in the rows. )
When I remove the characteristic from the columns, it works.
Is my assumption correct or am I missing something ?

Hi Guys,
the correct answer is:
the report designer needs fixed Columns. During Designtime the numbers of columns needs to be fixed, due to mapping reasons. This means if you have 2 dynamic parts Char in rows and columns, the runtime can not identify the corresponding rowpattern which should be applied. There for the limitation Fixed columns exists. But it should be possible to have 2 structures in the columns and several characteristics in Rows.
best regards,
Kai

7600 SIP-400 looped to same 7600

Hi,
We are proposing to install SIP-400's into our PE's 7600 (sup32) in order to provide egress traffic shaping and qos for our customers.
We are proposing to connect the SIP gig interfaces back to another line card on the same device, instead of putting another switch in front of our existing PE. This saves us a switch and lets us take advantage of the port density in our current 7600 PE's (which is why we purchased them in the first place).
We also plan to utilise the same approach to implement pwe xconnects on the SIP-400 subinterfaces. VLAN uniqueness per port is the key feature of the SIP-400 that facilitates this.
Has anyone run a similar setup? Any experiences to share?
I have tested in the lab and can't see any issues so far.
Does anyone know of a more cost effective qos / shaping solution for Ethernet tails? The SIP or ES20 based solutions seem overpriced for the pretty basic functionality we are after here. Doesn't have to be a Cisco box.
Kent.

"Doesn't have to be a Cisco box. "
If you're still interested in solving this (or haven't already), you can mail me at [email protected]
Cheers,
Anton

ASA - New HA Design - Limitations

hey folks,
I have these two brand spanking 5540's which would be configured in a HA design(Active/Standby)
The only bugger is this client has no spare IP's which can be used on the inside nor the outside.
Yes, all I have been given is two IP's(inside and outside)
I plan to use gig4 for command replication and monitoring
Yes, the design is such that these two new ASA's would be a second layer of security.
Now, is it absolutely necessary to have a secondary IP on the inside interface for the failover to occur or just a standby IP on the dedicated management interface is enough for the failover to happen?
Also, can someone let me know where ASA support interface tracking and punishing the active or standby device to give-up it's active state?
thanks.

Hello Mikull,
For a good desing ( Check the status of all the network interfaces) you do need it as failover is based on the exchange of hello packets between both the primary and secondary boxes.
Any other question.. Let me know.. Just remember to rate all of my answers.
Julio

Difference between OSM-2+4GE-WAN+ and 7600-SIP-400

hy guys,
If I want to use one of them as uplink, which are better ?

Depending on your current and future requirements the decision for SIP-400 or OSM-GEWAN needs to be taken.
As they both are different product sets meant to cater to different set of business requirements.
SIP-400
a) Provides you with capability to aggregate different flavours of
OC12,OC48 and other WAN and GE Interfaces as well as use them for uplink,
b) Supports VPLS
c) Supports MQC with conventional QOS.
d) Supports ATM Cell Relay.
e) Occupies 1 slot space
OSM-GEWAN.
a) Provides only Gigabit aggregation and uplink.
b) Supports VPLS.
c) Doesnt support ATM Cell Relay.
d) Supports MQC and conventional QOS.
e) Occupies 1 slot space,
Above are some difference in summary.
But if you requirement is to have only Gig aggregation and Gig uplinks then OSM
by far is a good choice. But if you have your aggregation done, and are looking for WAN aggregation with Enchanced features like conventional QOS and VPLS, Cell Relay etc, with the option if choosing the media types for your aggregation, then SIP-400 is vis-a-vis a good choice.
This comparision doesnt take into consideration the throughput performance of both categories vis-a-vis.
HTH-Cheers,
Swaroop

T430 USB 3.0 Design Limitation

Today my new T430 showed up. How sad and frustrated am I that my Corsair Voyager GT Pro doesn't fit into the USB 3.0 ports?
Lenovo has made the classic mistake (again). The ports are recessed under the edge of the keyboard tray. I'll start looking for a USB to USB short dongle, but wow.. .what were they thinking? How many times do they need to learn this?
If you have any USB device that isn't the standard sized housing (the part behind the actual metal plug), odds are good it will NOT fit in the 3.0 ports. So, buy a different laptop.
If Lenovo reads this and you have any suggestions or an FRU for a USB to USB dongle, please post it.

jrainey wrote:
Today my new T430 showed up. How sad and frustrated am I that my Corsair Voyager GT Pro doesn't fit into the USB 3.0 ports?
(snip)
If you have any USB device that isn't the standard sized housing (the part behind the actual metal plug), odds are good it will NOT fit in the 3.0 ports.
You should be complaining to Corsair about their funky shockproof rubber case design on that model.... on the flush surface mounted USB ports on my desktop computer, the oversized Voyager GT Pro case obstructs the adjoining USB port!
Its not specifically a T430s (or even laptop) problem.
Cheers,
Bill
I don't work for Lenovo

Touch 2G: design limits case options?

If you wanted to keep your Touch 2G in a leather or silicone case, wouldn't that make it very hard to hear the internal speaker?

Hmmm... I didn't know that.
Regardless, it seems that the case manufacturer could still provide an opening where the internal speaker is located.

7600 SSC-400 / SSC-600 Design Limitation

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for