Hi,
I have trouble to activate my Cisco NCS5xxx Devices.
Turns out that tools.cisco.com. resolves to either 173.37.145.8 (this
works) or 72.163.4.38 (which was decommissioned earlier this year).
By running
dig A tools.cisco.com @alln01-ucs-dcz03n-gslb1-snip.cisco.com
four times I can
On Thu 2016-Apr-28 09:48:09 +0200, Piotr <piotr.1...@interia.pl> wrote:
Hi,
There is a problem with sending emails from employees in @cisco.com
domain to some certain domain. Emails in opposite direction pass
without problem. No errors, warnings or any other logs at cisco's
employees d
Hi,
There is a problem with sending emails from employees in @cisco.com
domain to some certain domain. Emails in opposite direction pass without
problem. No errors, warnings or any other logs at cisco's employees
desktop.. We checked popular rbls, spamhauses, senderbase etc. Other
domains
I've been using it from Oregon, USA all morning without problems.
On 9/21/2015 11:51 AM, Murat Kaipov wrote:
Hi folks!
Is cisco.com <http://cisco.com/> unavailable or it is affected just for
Rostelecom?
Available in Hungary.
Roderick Beck
Sales - Europe and the Americas
This e-mail and any attachments thereto is intended only for use by the
addressee(s) named herein and may be proprietary and/or legally privileged. If
you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified
> Is cisco.com <http://cisco.com/> unavailable or it is affected just for
> Rostelecom?
Works fine here in The Netherlands (ISP: Solcon).
Cheers,
Sander
All set for me; East Africa, Kenya, Nairobi .. I can also see some serious
dude fixing a bike on the site.
Tracing route to cisco.com [72.163.4.161]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.0.1
211 ms 224 ms13 ms 10.34.0.1
3 7 ms 7 ms 6 ms
-ix.com COO/Chairman
> Internet Exchange - Peering - Distributed Fabric
>
>> On Sep 21, 2015, at 2:59 PM, Hugo Slabbert <h...@slabnet.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Is cisco.com <http://cisco.com/> unavailable or it is affected just for
>>>> Rostelecom?
>>
>> No problems here from either v4 or v6.
>>
>> --
>> Hugo
>
Is cisco.com <http://cisco.com/> unavailable or it is affected just for
Rostelecom?
No problems here from either v4 or v6.
--
Hugo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Murat Kaipov wrote:
> Hi folks!
> Is cisco.com <http://cisco.com/> unavailable or it is affected just for
> Rostelecom?
http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/cisco.com
> It's just you. http://cisco.com is up.
~Marcin
anog-boun...@nanog.org> on behalf of Murat Kaipov
<mkai...@outlook.com>
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 1:51 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: cisco.com unavailable
Hi folks!
Is cisco.com <http://cisco.com/> unavailable or it is affected just
for Rostelecom?
Murat Kaipov <mai
On 9/21/2015 11:51 AM, Murat Kaipov wrote:
Hi folks!
Is cisco.com <http://cisco.com/> unavailable or it is affected just for
Rostelecom?
All is well from Cogent, Charter, and Verizon Wireless
2 minutes ago all had worked fine, now I have same trouble.
mkaipov$ traceroute cisco.com
traceroute to cisco.com (72.163.4.161), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 router.asus.com (10.10.0.1) 1.536 ms 1.232 ms 1.176 ms
2 62.182.11.92 (62.182.11.92) 1.934 ms 2.924 ms 3.251 ms
3 isp2
<h...@slabnet.com> wrote:
>
>>> Is cisco.com <http://cisco.com/> unavailable or it is affected just for
>>> Rostelecom?
>
> No problems here from either v4 or v6.
>
> --
> Hugo
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 14:58:39 -0400, Dovid Bender said:
> Working from Verizon FiOS
>
> [root@yosefh-OptiPlex-3020 ~]# wget cisco.com
Somebody's a trusting soul :)
pgpp_mxiyGC6X.pgp
Description: PGP signature
I get there with no problem.
Scott Helms
Vice President of Technology
ZCorum
(678) 507-5000
http://twitter.com/kscotthelms
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Murat Kaipov <mkai...@outlook.com> wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
_
> From: NANOG <nanog-boun...@nanog.org> on behalf of Murat Kaipov
> <mkai...@outlook.com>
> Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 1:51 PM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: cisco.com unavailable
>
> Hi folks!
> Is cisco.com <http://cisco.com/> unavailable or it is affected just for
> Rostelecom?
ms47 ms48 ms 72.163.2.98
1448 ms48 ms48 ms 72.163.4.161
Josh Luthman
Office: 937-552-2340
Direct: 937-552-2343
1100 Wayne St
Suite 1337
Troy, OH 45373
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Murat Kaipov <mkai...@outlook.com> wrote:
> Hi folks!
> Is cisco.com <h
wwwds.cisco.com.edgekey.net
wwwds.cisco.com.edgekey.net.globalredir.akadns.net
Non-authoritative answer:
Name:cisco.com
Addresses: 2001:420:1101:1::a
72.163.4.161
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Murat Kaipov <mkai...@outlook.com> wrote:
> Hi folks!
>
Hi folks!
Is cisco.com <http://cisco.com/> unavailable or it is affected just for
Rostelecom?
It works fine for me from Cox.
---
Keith Stokes
From: NANOG <nanog-boun...@nanog.org> on behalf of Murat Kaipov
<mkai...@outlook.com>
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 1:51 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: cisco.com unavailable
Hi folks!
Working from Verizon FiOS
[root@yosefh-OptiPlex-3020 ~]# wget cisco.com
--2015-09-21 14:57:58-- http://cisco.com/
Resolving cisco.com (cisco.com)... 72.163.4.161, 2001:420:1101:1::a
Connecting to cisco.com (cisco.com)|72.163.4.161|:80... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 301
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and ETR?
Thanks,
Ben
Facebook seems to also be affected.
-Original Message-
From: R. Benjamin Kessler r...@mnsginc.com
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: cisco.com
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:34:46 -0400
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including
Both work from Austin, TX.
- d.
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Alex Nderitu wrote:
Facebook seems to also be affected.
-Original Message-
From: R. Benjamin Kessler r...@mnsginc.com
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: cisco.com
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:34:46 -0400
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get
Not sure the ETA but the network that the address for cisco.com resolves
to (198.133.219.0/24) is no longer in BGP.
--
-
Aaron Millisor
R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and ETR?
Here too
-- snip --
core-01.fra1#sh ip bgp 198.133.219.25
BGP4 : None of the BGP4 routes match the display condition
-- snap --
Facebook up. Cisco down. From eastern canada
--Original Message--
From: Alex Nderitu
To: R. Benjamin Kessler
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisco.com
Sent: Aug 4, 2009 10:42 AM
Facebook seems to also be affected.
-Original Message-
From: R. Benjamin Kessler r...@mnsginc.com
Seeing same issue from Chicago via Qwest and HE.
Both work from Austin, TX.
- d.
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Alex Nderitu wrote:
Facebook seems to also be affected.
-Original Message-
From: R. Benjamin Kessler r...@mnsginc.com
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: cisco.com
Date: Tue
...@mnsginc.com
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: cisco.com
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 09:34:46 -0400
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and ETR?
Thanks,
Ben
Am 04.08.2009 um 15:42 schrieb Alex Nderitu:
Facebook seems to also be affected.
facebook works fine from germany
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and
ETR?
An error occurred while
So cisco has no BGP is that what I'm hearing... Oh the irony :)
--Original Message--
From: Aaron Millisor
To: R. Benjamin Kessler
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisco.com
Sent: Aug 4, 2009 10:45 AM
Not sure the ETA but the network that the address for cisco.com resolves
See: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2009-August/001386.html
I do not have a route to that IP (198.133.219.25) in BGP either..
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 8:34 AM, R. Benjamin Kesslerr...@mnsginc.com wrote:
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
can't get to cisco.com from here atm either, but can get to facebook. looks like
facebook is now coming from ashburn, va.
cisco dies within level3 for us, and for route-views.oregon-ix.net:
5 eugn-core1-gw.nero.net (207.98.64.161) [AS 3701] !H * !H
don't see that address (198.133.219.25
On Tue Aug 04, 2009, Jon Auer wrote:
See: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2009-August/001386.html
I do not have a route to that IP (198.133.219.25) in BGP either..
Route is not longer in the routing table since (CET)
08/04 13:55:57 Withdraw 198.133.219.0/24
German
...@mnsginc.com wrote:
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and ETR?
Thanks,
Ben
Same here via Verizon, Level3 and Comcast.
Btw... all 3 resolve to the same 198.133.219.25 addr.
-Original Message-
From: Chris Gotstein [mailto:ch...@uplogon.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:48 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisco.com
Seeing same issue from Chicago via Qwest
Missing route on Internap also.
Netraft shows cisco.com went down right at 12:00GMT.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/perf/graph?site=www.cisco.com
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 8:48 AM, sjks...@sleepycatz.com wrote:
We have seen the route for cisco withdrawn from 208 and 2828. Facebook
seems fine
No route for 198.133.219.0/24 in 22820 from our upstream (3356 and 174).
-Scott W
-Original Message-
From: sjk [mailto:s...@sleepycatz.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
To: Dominic J. Eidson
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisco.com
We have seen the route for cisco
Hi everyone,
same issue from Italy, via Fastweb and Retelit.
deles...@gmail.com ha scritto:
Facebook up. Cisco down. From eastern canada
FB up, Cisco down, from SATX (Time Warner Road Runner)
J
Subject: Re: cisco.com
Am 04.08.2009 um 15:42 schrieb Alex Nderitu:
Facebook seems to also be affected.
facebook works fine from germany
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and
ETR?
An error occurred
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 09:34:46AM -0400, R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and ETR?
Instead of the hoot-n-holler line, maybe check bgp?
route-views.oregon
The IP is back in BGP and the website is working for me now.
Millisor
To: R. Benjamin Kessler
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisco.com
Sent: Aug 4, 2009 10:45 AM
Not sure the ETA but the network that the address for cisco.com resolves
to (198.133.219.0/24) is no longer in BGP.
--
-
Aaron
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisco.com
Same here in Prague (various upstreams in Central Europe)
MK
Jon Auer napsal(a):
See: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2009-
August/001386.html
I do not have a route to that IP (198.133.219.25) in BGP either
: Re: cisco.com
Sent: Aug 4, 2009 10:45 AM
Not sure the ETA but the network that the address for cisco.com resolves
to (198.133.219.0/24) is no longer in BGP.
--
-
Aaron Millisor
R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
Hey Gang -
I'm unable
Seeing them off of Sprint now. . . weird
sjk wrote:
We have seen the route for cisco withdrawn from 208 and 2828. Facebook
seems fine
On Aug 4, 2009, at 9:59 AM, Jason Vanick wrote:
Same here via Verizon, Level3 and Comcast.
No trouble in Virginia with either Cox Cable or Cogent.
Btw... all 3 resolve to the same 198.133.219.25 addr.
That's what I get
;; ANSWER SECTION:
cisco.com. 86400
On Tue Aug 04, 2009, Steve Rossen wrote:
Route is back
08/04 13:55:57 Withdraw 198.133.219.0/24
08/04 16:04:53 Update 198.133.219.0/24
Times are CET.
German
Missing route on Internap also.
Netraft shows cisco.com went down right at 12:00GMT.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/perf/graph?site
5.134 ms 4.477 ms
10 sl-gw18-sj-13-0-0.sprintlink.net (144.232.3.6) 71.695 ms 71.306
ms 72.170 ms
11 144.228.44.14 (144.228.44.14) 72.156 ms 72.895 ms 71.916 ms
12 sjce-dmzbb-gw1.cisco.com (128.107.239.89) 72.154 ms 144.228.44.14
(144.228.44.14) 72.301 ms sjce-dmzbb-gw1.cisco.com
16:03
À : nanog@nanog.org
Objet : Re: cisco.com
Missing route on Internap also.
Netraft shows cisco.com went down right at 12:00GMT.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/perf/graph?site=www.cisco.com
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 8:48 AM, sjks...@sleepycatz.com wrote:
We have seen the route for cisco withdrawn
I now have a route to 198.133.219.0/24
Cisco.com is back up.
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:03, Scott Wolfe scott.wo...@cybera.net wrote:
No route for 198.133.219.0/24 in 22820 from our upstream (3356 and 174).
-Scott W
-Original Message-
From: sjk [mailto:s...@sleepycatz.com]
Sent
I see it now via
6453 7132 109
174 1239 109
---Mike
Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400
Sentex Communications,m...@sentex.net
Providing Internet since
, August 04, 2009 7:04 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: cisco.com
No route for 198.133.219.0/24 in 22820 from our upstream (3356 and 174).
-Scott W
-Original Message-
From: sjk [mailto:s...@sleepycatz.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 8:49 AM
To: Dominic J. Eidson
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
but the network that the address for cisco.com
resolves to (198.133.219.0/24) is no longer in BGP.
--
-
Aaron Millisor
R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
Hey Gang - I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on
the 'net
(including
Cisco.com up again in Italy.
Regards,
German Martinez ha scritto:
On Tue Aug 04, 2009, Jon Auer wrote:
See: https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/outages/2009-August/001386.html
I do not have a route to that IP (198.133.219.25) in BGP either..
Route is not longer in the routing table
See Cisco as Up
Qwest, Cogent, Att, and L3
Midwest-US
~J
-Original Message-
From: Jorge Amodio [mailto:jmamo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 9:07 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: cisco.com
FB up, Cisco down, from SATX (Time Warner Road Runner)
J
Cisco.com (198.133.219.25) is alive from .au (from ASN7474)
Traceroute shows:
9 448 ms 419 ms 389 ms sjck-dmzbb-gw1.cisco.com [128.107.224.6]
10 427 ms 268 ms 279 ms sjck-dmzdc-gw2-gig5-1.cisco.com
[128.107.224.77]
Did a quick check on a few .au looking glass sites and getting
Up via Sprintlink in London...
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:14 AM, Matthew Huff wrote:
Looks like it's back.
rtr-inet1#show ip bgp 198.133.219.0/24
BGP routing table entry for 198.133.219.0/24, version 4296794
Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table)
Advertised to update-groups:
1
6128 7132 109,
Sam Oduor wrote:
http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/final_update_ciscocom_outage/
I don't think the Kool-Aid powder is blending with the water...that's
from (almost) two years ago.
pt
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 9:21 AM, Sam Oduorsam.od...@gmail.com wrote:
http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/final_update_ciscocom_outage/
Nice, except that the blog entry is from two years ago. What happened _today_?
On Aug 4, 2009, at 10:21 AM, Sam Oduor wrote:
http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/final_update_ciscocom_outage/
That blog post is from 2007 so I'm assuming this was sent as a joke.
: cisco.com
Sent: Aug 4, 2009 10:45 AM
Not sure the ETA but the network that the address for cisco.com resolves
to (198.133.219.0/24) is no longer in BGP.
[1]http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/final_update_ciscocom_outage/
FINAL UPDATE: Cisco.com Outage
Service to [2]Cisco.com has been restored and all applications are now
fully operational. The issue occurred during preventative maintenance
of one of our data centers when
[cid:image001.jpg@01CA14F5.A289E6D0]
From: Matthew Huff
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 11:19 AM
To: 'Myke Lyons'
Cc: 'nanog@nanog.org'
Subject: RE: cisco.com
[2]http://blogs.cisco.com/news/comments/final_update_ciscocom_outage/
FINAL UPDATE: Cisco.com Outage
Service
Well, Cisco *did* EoS/EoL BGP last week. I guess there really wasn't
all that much industry traction on whatever protocol they decided to
replace it with.
https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/2009-July/062646.html
What happened could be:
a) they were smoking something and indeed
On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, h...@efes.iucc.ac.il wrote:
a) they were smoking something and indeed decided to use EIGRP rather than
BGP.
b) they were testing out 4 byte ASNs and had a software issue in their IOS
c) someone in Cisco wanted to download a new IOS and got frustrated with
their new site so
On 5/08/2009, at 1:34 AM, R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and
ETR?
CCNAs everywhere panic as their monitoring tools tell them that the
'Internet' is down
2009/8/5 Nathan Ward na...@daork.net
On 5/08/2009, at 1:34 AM, R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
Hey Gang -
I'm unable to get to cisco.com from multiple places on the 'net
(including downforeveryoneorjustme.com); any ideas on the cause and ETR?
CCNAs everywhere panic as their monitoring tools
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
No idea -- maybe just a hiccup?
- From my office in San Jose:
%traceroute www.cisco.com
Tracing route to www.cisco.com [198.133.219.25]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
[snip]
7 3 ms 3 ms 3 ms so-3-0-0.mpr2.sjc7.us.above.net
Im seeing issues at sbc as well
P:\tracert cisco.com
Tracing route to cisco.com [198.133.219.25]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
11 ms1 ms1 ms 10.5.7.254
21 ms1 ms1 ms 209.10.21.253
328 ms28 ms28 ms 209.10.9.37
428 ms27 ms27 ms 209.10.9.25
: Problems with either Cisco.com or ATT?
*** PGP SIGNATURE VERIFICATION ***
*** Status: Good Signature from Invalid Key
*** Alert:Please verify signer's key before trusting signature.
*** Signer: Paul Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED] (0x63546533)
*** Signed: 8/8/2007 2:17:21 PM
*** Verified: 8/8
...
-Benson
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Marcus H. Sachs
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 1:33 PM
To: 'Paul Ferguson'
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Problems with either Cisco.com or ATT?
Ditto. We've had a few folks
I can't speak for Cisco or Cisco IT, but as evidenced by this email,
at least part of our connectivity is up.
No doubt someone official is looking at it as we speak. (I'll just
lurk Nanog to get the skinny)..
A brief look at routeviews shows www.cisco.com (198.133.219.25)
originating
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Ferguson wrote:
No idea -- maybe just a hiccup?
No, the outage is real and affecting network and systems for internal and
external services.
- --
=
bep
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using
: Michael Airhart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 3:06 PM
To: Schliesser, Benson
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Problems with either Cisco.com or ATT?
I can't speak for Cisco or Cisco IT, but as evidenced by this email,
at least part of our connectivity is up
http://infiltrated.net/ciscoOutage.jpg
--
J. Oquendo
Excusatio non petita, accusatio manifesta
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0xF684C42E
sil . infiltrated @ net http://www.infiltrated.net
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -- Michael Airhart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't speak for Cisco or Cisco IT, but as evidenced by this email,
at least part of our connectivity is up.
No doubt someone official is looking at it as we speak. (I'll just
lurk Nanog to get the
80 matches
Mail list logo
