At 6:34 PM +0000 6/25/03, annlee wrote: >I found the sense dubious at the time ;-) but it was how the customer wanted >to do it... > >Annlee
I never cease to be amazed at how less-than-well-informed-customers demand crazy protocol changes. One of my favorites was to introduce something along the lines of detailed NetFlow in a price-sensitive DSL ISP, so they could look for (blocked by policy) HTTP servers. They couldn't understand why I suggested they simply filter on TCP port 80. But as to your customer, some people like write-only memory. > >""David Vital"" wrote in message >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Ahhh That just turned on a small light bulb for me. So you have >> uiniderectional service but you configure it for diferent paths to and >> from. I have seen a similar installation and I just figured the design >team >> had gone insane. now it makes sense. I like this explanation better. >> > > David Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71377&t=71263 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
