Learning aids [7:6863]
Hi, Would someone who is aware of self-study CDs please write and suggest the better ones available for CCNP. Thanks, Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6863&t=6863 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? [7:6864]
1) linux is not UNIX, similiar but not the same, check it out before speak it out. 2) Cisco IOS is Unix based since then. 3) I just hardly believe that, Unix can not be used GUI too. Please tell me what is x-windows, CDE. 4)Please check out the information before you post. 5)The technical knowledge of this jason guy make me laugh and tyring to show off... Correct me if i am wrong. abc Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6864&t=6864 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? [7:6865]
ANy thing MS gets in , they ace it regardless if they have better product or not so WIn2K will be king of NOS and Unix will be dead in few years..at least for new deployments..who care of ATMS and old unix install base... ""Jon Krabbenschmidt"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > You think ATM's run on NT? If that were true than there would be a "reboot" > button on every ATM for customer convenience. :>) > I always thought that behind every good ATM was a better Osborne ExecII? Oh > well what a sheltered life I live > > -Original Message- > From: Jason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 10:05 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? > [7:6790] > > > What was your point ? That Multics sucks , and by the same token, therefore > Unix sucks and NT/W2K rules !!! At least, NT/W2K was based on a working > operating system. Anyone of you notice that Unix is all about ego ? If Unix > is finished in 1 month, why are there still people working on it ? On the > other hand, if Unix is perfect, why the hell are people working on it ? If > Unix promotes innovation, why is nobody using it ? Would you trust you ATM > machine to Linux ? > > > > ""Jim Dixon"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > THE PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE B > > > > ABSTRACT > > B is a computer language designed by D. M. Ritchie and K. L. Thompson, for > > primarily non-numeric applications such as system programming. These > > typically involve complex logical decision-making, and processing of > > integers, characters, and bit strings. On the H6070 TSS system, B programs > > are usually much easier to write and understand than assembly language > > programs, and object code efficiency is almost as good. Implementation of > > simple TSS subsystems is an especially appropriate use for B. This > technical > > report contains a description of the MH-TSS (Honeywell 6070) version of B > > (by S. C. Johnson), and a tutorial introduction to most of the features of > > the language (by B. W. Kernighan). > > > > Ken Thompson > > The principal inventor of the Unix operating system and author of > > the B language, the predecessor of C. > > > > In the early days Ken used to hand-cut Unix distribution tapes, often with > a > > note that read "Love, ken". Old-timers still use his first name (sometimes > > uncapitalised, because it's a login name and mail address) in third-person > > reference; it is widely understood (on Usenet in particular) that without > a > > last name "Ken" refers only to Ken Thompson. Similarly, Dennis without > last > > name means Dennis Ritchie (and he is often known as dmr). > > > > Ken was first hired to work on the Multics project, which was a huge > > production with many people working on it. Multics was supposed to support > > hundreds of on-line logins but could barely handle three. > > > > In 1969, when Bell Labs withdrew from the project, Ken got fed up with > > Multics and went off to write his own operating system. People said "well, > > if zillions of people wrote Multics, then an OS written by one guy must be > > Unix!". There was some joking about eunichs as well. > > > > Ken's wife Bonnie and son Corey (then 18 months old) went to visit family > in > > San Diego. Ken spent one week each on the kernel, file system, etc., and > > finished UNIX in one month along with developing SPACEWAR (or was it > "Space > > Travel"?). > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 5:40 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? > > [7:6675] > > > > > > >Want to make any UNIX-head apoplex? Remind them that DOS is UNIX subset. > > >The multi-tasking & multi-threaded functions were dropped because there > > >weren't enough bits in the registers for the Intel 8088. These were added > > >back in when the hardware for PC's was available. However, they did add > > >better mnemonics for the UNIX commands so 'ls' became 'dir'. 'Easy' > > >translates to 'stupid' somehow. But even so it's UNIX! DOS is UNIX! > > >tee-hee. > > > > > >DOS clowns. > > >UNIX dweebs. > > >NT geeks. > > >Cisco nerds. > > >Where's Diane Arbus when we need her? > > > > > >- susan > > > > > > Get back to the origins of the name UNIX. Pronounced aloud, is there > > an English word that comes to mind? > > > > The ancestor of UNIX is MULTICS. UNIX is castrated MULTICS. > > > > Extra credit for the two predecessors of C. (No, the first one isn't A). Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6865&t=6865 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Technology Religion (was Re: last word: UNIX guys look down [7:6866]
On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, Cthulu wrote: > I have said it before and I will say it again: all OSes and IOSes s*ck in > their own special way. If they did not, none of us would have a job. > Please, enjoy the unqiue s*ckiness of each component you deal with, and do > not compare it to other components. Do I hear echoes of the Monestary here? :-) -- "Someone approached me and asked me to teach a javascript course. I was about to decline, saying that my complete ignorance of the subject made me unsuitable, then I thought again, that maybe it doesn't, as driving people away from it is a desirable outcome." --Me Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6866&t=6866 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Support of ISL/802.1Q in ethernet interface [7:6867]
Hi folks, I know ISL/802.1q can only be implemented with FE or GigE. Is there any reason why ethernet interface isn't in the game? I know 10mbps is slow but it's a useful feature for folks with 10mbps swithces online and don't have routers with FE interface. I overheard somewhere that newer ios has such feature for supporting isl/802.1q in 10mbps ethernet interface. Can anyone verify this? Thanks for helping. -Frank Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6867&t=6867 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sybex virtual lab for CCNP certification [7:6868]
Hi all, Has anyone used this product yet ? is it worth the investment and the virtual routers allowed to do all the functions within the CCNP certification. Thanks Justin Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6868&t=6868 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A lot of studying material to exchange!! [7:6869]
HI, There have a lot of MCSE W2K and CCNA notes and MCs!! If you want to exchange , pls write me email immediately!! Most Wanted : CCNP / CCDA / CCIE / Sun Solaris Adm I and II Thanks, William Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6869&t=6869 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: It group study worth it or not!!!??? [7:6837]
Hi all, Fairly basic question I think, but as I've not had anything to do with Newsgroups before this one, I don't know the answer: I take it that if you subscribe, you send an e-mail which goes to everyone who's subscribed, but if you don't subscribe, (ie. you just post to the newsgroup) the only people that see your message are the ones that view the newsgroup. Is this the case, or have I got it wrong? One more quick question. Has the formatting of the threads gone all to pot. I've sent a couple of e-mails to Paul with a low priority asking if something is wrong, as I have a couple of other news groups which are fine. The problem seems to be that threads never seem to go deeper than one post, threads get separated, threads marked as 'watched' do not function correctly. Anybody? Cheers, Gaz ""Michael L. Williams"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > FOLLOW UP MESSAGE: > > I went back and looked at your other messages. There were ALOT of > questions. Some were broad.. broad enough that a simple Google search > or search of Cisco's website could have found some answers. > > I'm not flaming you at all.. but when you have 13 (!!) questions, try to > break them up into separate messages or groups of related messages each with > a descriptive headers. that might get a better response. But also, the > group likes people that have at least put some effort into answering their > own questions. And questions like: > > "What is the purpose of ICMP messages?" > "What are the features of SNMP ? " > "What is ERLANG B?" > > don't show any indication that you've at least done a simple web search to > find your answers. > > Here's what I found: > > "What is the purpose of ICMP messages?" > Google (http://www.google.com) search using the search terms "purpose ICMP". > This was the top result > http://www.ee.siue.edu/~rwalden/networking/icmp.html > Cisco (http://www.cisco.com) search using the search terms "ICMP overview" > (overview is one of my favorite Cisco search terms =). Top result: > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/ito_doc/ip.htm#xtocid223631 > 3 > > > "What are the features of SNMP ? " > Cisco search on "SNMP" First 2 results: > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/ito_doc/snmp.htm > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/intsolns/dialnms/snmpover.h > tm > > "What is ERLANG B?" > Google search on "ERLANG B". Third result: > http://www.owenduffy.com.au/electronics/erlangb.htm (even has the > mathematical formula for an Erlang distribution) > http://mmc.et.tudelft.nl/~frits/Erlang.htm (an java Erlang calulator > with a picture of A.K. Erlang on it... HA!) > Cisco search on "ERLANG B". Second result: > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/voice/ics7750/design/dprov.h > tm (page on traffic engineering) > > Now. is this the kind of information you were wanting from your > original post? If so, then I'm glad to provide it. But I must say that > with 5 minutes and searching only using 2 websites, I found all of this and > more relating to your questions. It's 5 minutes of my time that I was happy > to provide, but 5 minutes of your time that the group will expect you to > provide yourself next time. > > Mike W. > > "Mike Peterson" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > Hi All, A while back I posted some questions but I haven't got any > > answers back from no one whomake me think that ether nobody have an > > answer or the oposite ...no one wants to share the knowledge between us.I > > would like to find out what do you guys think about this total > silence.Thanks > > a lot for your thoughts. Mike > > > > > > > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6870&t=6837 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
STP commands [7:6871]
Can someone please shed some light on this? I have read many times (on p153-158) on Cisco BCMSN book but still very confused between on the following 4 commands: And I don't understand when do you have to use them, since I thought root port is determined by the lowest path cost. If equal, it goes for the lowest Bridge ID. And if it still equals, it goes for the lowest port ID. 1) set spantree portpri 2/3 [vlans] VS 2) set spantree portvlanpri 2/3 [vlans] And 3) set spantree portcost 2/3 VS 4) set spantree portvlancost 2/3 cost [vlan] Thanks! Regards, Hunt Lee IP Solution Analyst Cable and Wireless Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6871&t=6871 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? [7:6872]
You make me laugh even more... 1. When has that become a issue ? LOL 2 + 3 . So show me a Cisco router running x-windows since Cisco IOS is unix based and Unix can run x-windows . :-) . X-Window is NOT Unix, but let's not get technical here, you won't understand... 4. Yes, I would highly suggest that you do the same .. 5. I have not even bother to display any technical knowledge here, all this are empty talk/arguement, anytime you have a this OS is better than that OS, it is empty talk !! Absolutely no value in it at all. You should be aware of that even before you reply to this message. ""abc"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > 1) linux is not UNIX, similiar but not the same, check it out before > speak it out. > > 2) Cisco IOS is Unix based since then. > > 3) I just hardly believe that, Unix can not be used GUI too. Please > tell me what is x-windows, CDE. > > 4)Please check out the information before you post. > > 5)The technical knowledge of this jason guy make me laugh and tyring to > show off... > > Correct me if i am wrong. > abc Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6872&t=6872 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Technology Religion (was Re: last word: UNIX guys look down [7:6873]
Definitely agree with you here. Definitely should end the minute some people start hidding behind fake emails and getting personal. :-) ""Cthulu"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Can we please kill this post Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6873&t=6873 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OT: Selling Cisco 2503 in Original Box w/ all accesories [7:6875]
Hi Group, I've got a 2503 router in original packaging with all docs & accessories. Make me an offer, a serious offer =). (Not sure about memory specs, will check) Thanks Albert Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6875&t=6875 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
4500 flash problem [7:6874]
hi all, i have had a problem with my 4500 router, i think I need to replace the flash and upload the new image from the tftp server is it the correct method. below is the output that i get when I boot the router loadprog: error - on read during ELF program load requested 6789992 (0x679b68) bytes, got 4481364 (0x446154) boot: cannot load "flash:" System Bootstrap, Version 5.1(1) [daveu 1], RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) Copyright (c) 1994 by cisco Systems, Inc. C4500 processor with 32768 Kbytes of main memory unknown flash device - mandev code = 0x890b cannot read flash info getdevnum warning: device "boot flash" has size of zero unknown flash device - mandev code = 0x890b cannot read flash info getdevnum warning: device "boot flash" has size of zero open: read error...requested 0x4 bytes, got 0x trouble reading device magic number boot: cannot open "bootflash:" boot: cannot determine first file name on device "bootflash:" System Bootstrap, Version 5.1(1) [daveu 1], RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) Copyright (c) 1994 by cisco Systems, Inc. C4500 processor with 32768 Kbytes of main memory rommon 1 > Thanks. Omer Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6874&t=6874 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
Any CCIE or CCIE candidate worth his salt would want the lab to be tougher. A number of study aids are now available that were not in the past. This has somewhat lessened the difficulty of the process (as witnessed by the backlog of people taking the lab after breezing through the written). Making it tougher is just a method of counterbalancing all of the increased study aids and maintaining the value of the CCIE cert. If you truly want to obtain your CCIE then you should want it to be as difficult as possible, otherwise where is the value in the cert? If you are not up to the challenge, then don't make the attempt. As for who should evaluate the CCIE program - most (not all)employers couldn't begin to answer the questions about what is needed from a CCIE. The biggest employer of CCIE's is Cisco (by far) so they should already have an idea of what is needed. Cisco has been respectful enough of the CCIE population to also ask for their input and most have given it willingly. My main interested is in preserving the value of the CCIE cert. I am currently studying for my 2nd CCIE cert and still hope they make it tougher (before I complete it). I also hope they make the recertification tests tougher as well. I'm up to the challenge - are you? Louie -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bradley J. Wilson Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 3:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] Forgive my cynicism, but any CCIE *would* want the lab to be tougher - they would know that any CCIEs that came along after they received their number increase the supply, thus lowering the cost of the good. ;-) I think Cisco ought to be asking companies who *hire* CCIEs what skills *they* would like to see in those who carry the CCIE certification - not the number-carrying CCIEs themselves. BJ P.S. And while I'm feeling cynical...can we please move the "NT vs. UNIX" nonsense to private emails or perhaps a different mail list? Thenks. - Original Message - From: Belt, Louie To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 2:15 PM Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] I filled out my survey and told them I wanted it to stay a two day lab - and if anything - make it tougher. The explosion of materials available to help people get though the written and prepare for the lab has taken some of the challenge out of the process in my opinion. I would prefer they keep it a 2 day lab, make it mean as h*** and keep the prestige in the cert. I also told them I did not want them to stop issuing the medal for those who succeed. Louie -Original Message- From: CCIE Wanna BE To: Belt, Louie; '[EMAIL PROTECTED] ' Sent: 6/1/01 8:23 AM Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] So what is everyone's take? --- "Belt, Louie" wrote: > That is simply one possible solution. They have > sent a survey out to all of > the CCIE's to get their feedback and suggestions. > > Louie > > -Original Message- > From: CCIE Wanna BE > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 6/1/01 5:35 AM > Subject: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > A Cisco manager/CCIE told me that Cisco was planing > on > moving from the two day CCIE lab, to a one day > (because of the back log). But the 1 day isn't > going > to be easier, it's going to be harder > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - > only $35 > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ sco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6876&t=6735 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PC to PC thru 2 routers??? [7:6877]
Hi, I'm Bob, a computer trainer. I have a lab set up with 2 PCs with 2 routers between, a 3600 and 2600. I have both end PCs on a 192.168.0.0 network going through my e0/1 between routers on a 10.0.0 nw. I can ping from router to router, but not from router to the outer PCs., nor of course can I ping from outer pc to outer pc. Is there something I'm not considering right? -- Bob Lepine MCSE,MCDBA,CNA,CCNA,MCT Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6877&t=6877 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Passed CIT - Now a CCNP!! [7:6725]
Since May 14th all CCNP specializations have been retired. However you may do the specializations as in the pages below: http://cisco.com/warp/public/10/wwtraining/whats_new/ Good Luck. avran "George Murphy CCNP" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Congratulations and thats a hell of a score, especially for that exam... I > am now doing > CCDP after CCNP and I had to gear down and review the basics and get some > patience for > the case studies. I am using Boson and Ciscopress exam guide to study > with.. > > Andrew Larkins wrote: > > > I passed my final exam yesterday - CIT with a score of 919. > > At last I have my CCNP. > > > > Many thanks to everyone on this list for all the informative threads and > > help with problems I have had over this pass period. > > > > Now to do my CCDP and security specialisation - anyone have any tips for > > these > > > > Thanks again > > > > Andrew Larkins > > BCom, CCNP, CCDA > > Bytes Technology Group Limited > > Tel : +27 11 800 9467 > > Fax : +27 11 800 9496 > > Mobile : +27 83 656 7214 > > Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > OR [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > "This message may contain information which is confidential and subject to > > legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not > peruse, > > use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message. If you have received > > this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by email, > > facsimile or telephone and return and/or destroy the original message." Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6878&t=6725 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: STP commands [7:6871]
Dear Hunt, 1 & 3 apply to all VLANs on the respective ports--all VLANs are treated the same. Commands 2 and 4 allow you to change the values on a per-VLAN basis, treating each VLAN differently. Hope this helps! Enjoy! Richard Deal [EMAIL PROTECTED] * CCNP test author for www.equizware.com 500 questions each for the Routing, Switching, Remote Access, and Support tests * Author of the following Coriolis books: CCNP Switching Exam Cram, CCNP Remote Access Exam Prep, and CCNP Cisco Lan Switch Configuration ___ ""Hunt Lee"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Can someone please shed some light on this? I have read many times (on > p153-158) on Cisco BCMSN book but still very confused between on the > following 4 commands: And I don't understand when do you have to use > them, since I thought root port is determined by the lowest path cost. > If equal, it goes for the lowest Bridge ID. And if it still equals, it > goes for the lowest port ID. > > 1) set spantree portpri 2/3 [vlans] > VS > 2) set spantree portvlanpri 2/3 [vlans] > > And > > 3) set spantree portcost 2/3 > VS > 4) set spantree portvlancost 2/3 cost [vlan] > > Thanks! > > Regards, > Hunt Lee > IP Solution Analyst > Cable and Wireless Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6879&t=6871 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: PC to PC thru 2 routers??? [7:6877]
What routing protocol are you using Bob. Post yer configs and help will arrive! -Original Message- From: Bob Lepine [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 02 June 2001 15:25 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: PC to PC thru 2 routers??? [7:6877] Hi, I'm Bob, a computer trainer. I have a lab set up with 2 PCs with 2 routers between, a 3600 and 2600. I have both end PCs on a 192.168.0.0 network going through my e0/1 between routers on a 10.0.0 nw. I can ping from router to router, but not from router to the outer PCs., nor of course can I ping from outer pc to outer pc. Is there something I'm not considering right? -- Bob Lepine MCSE,MCDBA,CNA,CCNA,MCT Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6880&t=6877 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PC to PC thru 2 routers??? [7:6877]
Each PC needs to be on a separate subnet or network unless you are bridging. You then need to define the router interface local to each PC as the default gateway. try these three subnets... 192.168.1.0 192.168.2.0 192.168.3.0 using a mask of 255.255.255.0 good luckBryan - Original Message - From: "Bob Lepine" To: Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 10:24 AM Subject: PC to PC thru 2 routers??? [7:6877] > Hi, I'm Bob, a computer trainer. I have a lab set up with 2 PCs with 2 > routers between, a 3600 and 2600. I have both end PCs on a 192.168.0.0 > network going through my e0/1 between routers on a 10.0.0 nw. I can ping > from router to router, but not from router to the outer PCs., nor of course > can I ping from outer pc to outer pc. Is there something I'm not considering > right? > > > -- > Bob Lepine > MCSE,MCDBA,CNA,CCNA,MCT Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6881&t=6877 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PC to PC thru 2 routers??? [7:6877]
check the physice links "Bob Lepine" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hi, I'm Bob, a computer trainer. I have a lab set up with 2 PCs with 2 > routers between, a 3600 and 2600. I have both end PCs on a 192.168.0.0 > network going through my e0/1 between routers on a 10.0.0 nw. I can ping > from router to router, but not from router to the outer PCs., nor of course > can I ping from outer pc to outer pc. Is there something I'm not considering > right? > > > -- > Bob Lepine > MCSE,MCDBA,CNA,CCNA,MCT Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6882&t=6877 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
where has the bible or dump for 504? [7:6883]
anybody know it ,please tell me Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6883&t=6883 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
If I weren't up to the challenge, I wouldn't be on this newsgroup. Are you up to the challenge of leaving the bar at the same height that it was when *you* passed the test? I personally think the test is difficult enough as it is. Am I a wimp because of that? Do we need to dump some dirt on the top of Everest now that it's been conquered by someone else ahead of me? If Cisco wants to make the test "tougher," they're well within their rights to do so. I just hope they don't call it the "CCIE" - call it something different, and reset the numbers to zero (or 1025, whichever). - Original Message - From: Louie Belt To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:33 AM Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] Any CCIE or CCIE candidate worth his salt would want the lab to be tougher. A number of study aids are now available that were not in the past. This has somewhat lessened the difficulty of the process (as witnessed by the backlog of people taking the lab after breezing through the written). Making it tougher is just a method of counterbalancing all of the increased study aids and maintaining the value of the CCIE cert. If you truly want to obtain your CCIE then you should want it to be as difficult as possible, otherwise where is the value in the cert? If you are not up to the challenge, then don't make the attempt. As for who should evaluate the CCIE program - most (not all)employers couldn't begin to answer the questions about what is needed from a CCIE. The biggest employer of CCIE's is Cisco (by far) so they should already have an idea of what is needed. Cisco has been respectful enough of the CCIE population to also ask for their input and most have given it willingly. My main interested is in preserving the value of the CCIE cert. I am currently studying for my 2nd CCIE cert and still hope they make it tougher (before I complete it). I also hope they make the recertification tests tougher as well. I'm up to the challenge - are you? Louie -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bradley J. Wilson Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 3:11 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] Forgive my cynicism, but any CCIE *would* want the lab to be tougher - they would know that any CCIEs that came along after they received their number increase the supply, thus lowering the cost of the good. ;-) I think Cisco ought to be asking companies who *hire* CCIEs what skills *they* would like to see in those who carry the CCIE certification - not the number-carrying CCIEs themselves. BJ P.S. And while I'm feeling cynical...can we please move the "NT vs. UNIX" nonsense to private emails or perhaps a different mail list? Thenks. - Original Message - From: Belt, Louie To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 2:15 PM Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] I filled out my survey and told them I wanted it to stay a two day lab - and if anything - make it tougher. The explosion of materials available to help people get though the written and prepare for the lab has taken some of the challenge out of the process in my opinion. I would prefer they keep it a 2 day lab, make it mean as h*** and keep the prestige in the cert. I also told them I did not want them to stop issuing the medal for those who succeed. Louie -Original Message- From: CCIE Wanna BE To: Belt, Louie; '[EMAIL PROTECTED] ' Sent: 6/1/01 8:23 AM Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] So what is everyone's take? --- "Belt, Louie" wrote: > That is simply one possible solution. They have > sent a survey out to all of > the CCIE's to get their feedback and suggestions. > > Louie > > -Original Message- > From: CCIE Wanna BE > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 6/1/01 5:35 AM > Subject: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > A Cisco manager/CCIE told me that Cisco was planing > on > moving from the two day CCIE lab, to a one day > (because of the back log). But the 1 day isn't > going > to be easier, it's going to be harder > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - > only $35 > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ sco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6884&t=6735 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IS-IS on 1600s? [7:6885]
anyone know whether it is possible to run IS-IS on a 1600-series router (non R-type)? I have been thru the Featue Navigator and tried a number of the images - the "router isis" command is there and accepted, but it is impossible to specify a NET, etc. I know that for OSPF on these boxes an IP-Plus image is needed - any similar gotchas for IS-IS? I have 10Meg flash and 8Meg RAM which rules out the 12.2 series, but think I'm okay apart from that. many thanks Andy Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6885&t=6885 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: where has the bible or dump for 504? [7:6883]
Unless my English has totally left me I reckon you might need to elaborate slightly as I do not have a clue what you are on about! -Original Message- From: samuel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 02 June 2001 16:30 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: where has the bible or dump for 504? [7:6883] anybody know it ,please tell me Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6886&t=6883 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BGP -Maximum Paths [7:6887]
Hey gang, I have a question on maximum-paths in BGP; This is the scenario: 4 T1's running EBGP to our ISP in a multihome peer session; each of the circuits go to a different POP. Each of the peer sessions receive a partial routing table from our provider. What we have found is that load sharing (outbound to our ISP) is virtually non-existant. well, i'm studying for BCSN and came across the maximum path feature, and it seems like the solution. My question is this: we have enabled maximum-path 4 to load share between the four sessions. This, however has had a neglible effect. Does the fact that we still hear routes from the provider from different pops affect this? In other words, since the 4 pops are in a different geographical area, and therefore may send a different bgp table which in turns overrides the maximum path command. I want to try having the provider send a default route instead; the thought being that our router will not have to decide on best paths, and leave that to ISP router, but the powers to be don't want that (for some reason...) Does anyone have any suggestions? thanks all, moe _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6887&t=6887 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: T-shirt WAS RE: Anyone going to Networkers? [7:6719]
You can't be having a cat get together without Pamela Forsythe's involvement. :-> Chuck -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Priscilla Oppenheimer Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 2:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:RE: T-shirt WAS RE: Anyone going to Networkers? [7:6719] That would be great! My cat Kingsford is famous. He has been mentioned in a few technical books, been on TV, and is on a few Web sites, including mine (of course). It's a really bad picture here: http://www.priscilla.com/kingsford.html He even got e-mail once! Some spammer misinterpreted a host-name example on a Web page that used Kingsford. We'll have to put Howard's cat Clifford in the picture too! Clifford is Howard's feline editorial assistant, acknowledged in Howard's latest book along with human assistants. Priscilla At 02:16 PM 6/1/01, Hornbeck, Timothy wrote: >I think we should name the cat Kingsford, in honor of Priscilla. > >I feel like a stalker now. Don't worry Priscilla, I remember you had your >cat's picture on your website. > >I like the shirt idea. How true is that design? > >- Tim > >-Original Message- >From: Daniel Cotts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 12:30 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: T-shirt WAS RE: Anyone going to Networkers? [7:6719] > > >A distinct T-shirt would be one way to identify one another. >Let's reopen the Groupstudy T-shirt thread. Someone suggested that we create >a T-shirt design and then make it available to members. There was some >activity - but no conclusion. >Let me submit a word picture of a suggested design: >Room in home. Through window moon can be seen - it's late at night. Calendar >on wall has two dates circled in red - labeled "LAB". Frantic but exhausted >"candidate" is typing on keyboard. Rack of routers behind. AGS+ on floor >with snoozing cat atop. Scattered books with first names of known authors on >covers. Spouse in nightgown standing at bedroom door - arms folded - looking >impatient. >There should be versions for male and female GroupStudy members. >Any thoughts? Yes, the cat's name is Clifford. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Jon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 1:12 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Anyone going to Networkers? [7:6719] > > > > > > Networkers L.A. is in a few short weeks. I'll be there, > > probably wishing > > everyone would turn the air conditioning up. > > > > Is anyone else from the list attending? Enough interest to > > put together a > > gathering on evening? Perhaps Sunday, before we get too > > caught up in the > > week's events -- assuming most folks are arriving early to > > attend a power > > session. > > > > Any ideas on how to decorate our nametags to show we're part > > of the elite > > GroupStudy following? (Following what, I know not, but I > > suspect it's a > > trail of Howard's bad jokes). > > > > -jon- > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 > > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > Report misconduct > > and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Priscilla Oppenheimer http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6888&t=6719 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: VERY strange 2621 behavior [7:6636]
Might want to take a look at this link. courtesy of Adam Quiggle, who used to spend a lot of time here. http://home.nc.rr.com/quiggle/ConfigReg.xls CCIE candidates, anyway, should be familiar with the config register values. Manipulating them can provide one part of a router security program. Chuck -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of John Neiberger Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 7:23 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:RE: VERY strange 2621 behavior [7:6636] I discovered that somehow the configuration register was changed to 0x3922! What the heck does that do?? I was watching the person who initially booted the router and he did absolutely nothing that would alter the configuration register; it just seems to have done it during a reload because we didn't notice this odd behavior until we did a warm reboot. Very bizarre. But, since I changed the config register back to 0x2102 it seems to be working normally. I can think of nothing that would cause an unexpected configuration register change like that. Oh well, another weird issue in the books. I think I'll be upgrading the IOS on that pretty quickly! John >>> Daniel Cotts 5/31/01 12:36:51 PM >>> Time to change your terminal emulation software to different speeds until you find the correct one. I have heard that with Hyperterminal that you need to completely close down the application for each speed change. Others may comment from experience. BTW Do you have a SmartNet service contract on that box? > -Original Message- > From: John Neiberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 12:41 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: VERY strange 2621 behavior [7:6636] > > > This is exceptionally strange > > We just received a used 2621 running 12.0(7)T. Initially it booted > just fine and we got a prompt. While in priveleged mode we did a show > run and intertwined with the output was a portion of a message. The > readable portion said something about "environment write to NVRAM > failed". We saw this three or four times. > > So, after poking around a bit we did a reload. During the reload we > saw the error again. Toward the end of the reload we > received a warning > message that said something like this: "This action will disable > password recovery. Be sure that you have alternatives to password > recovery before continuing. Continue with operation [yes/no]? " > > I have absolutely no idea what that means, I have never seen anything > like it before. We answered no, of course. At this point the router > locked up and it appears that the console baud rate has changed but so > far we're unable to figure out what it changed to. I've rebooted the > router several times to no avail. Nothing but gibberish on > my terminal > screen. > > Any thoughts? I've searched CCO and have yet to see anything about > this behavior yet. > > Thanks, > John > Report misconduct > and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6889&t=6636 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BGP -Maximum Paths [7:6887]
BGP multi-path only works with *identical* prefixes, the only difference between the paths permitted is the router-ID of the originating router. Are you certsin that you are receiving identical routes from all the PoPs? If you have four T-1s I would suggest that before worrying about load-balancing, you seriously look at resilience in your uplink - ie split your T-1s out over at least one other router. As far as load balancing goes, and assuming that the PoPs are all pretty equally connected, it is up to you how to weight the routes. A really basic, semi-arbitrary way might be to match as-paths on each link as transiting each of the top 4 Tier-1s: UUNet - AS701 C&W - AS 3561 AboveNet - 6461 BBN - AS1 (not sure my details are entirely up to date, but open to comment) and the set the local-preference to >100 for these paths on each router this might be a starting point - it is a coarse grained way to split the traffic, you can fine-tune from there. it may be worth checking those AS-paths on each router to see whether any one of the four is best connected to those routes. hth Andy - Original Message - From: "moe humm" To: Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 5:01 PM Subject: BGP -Maximum Paths [7:6887] > Hey gang, > > I have a question on maximum-paths in BGP; > > This is the scenario: 4 T1's running EBGP to our ISP in a multihome peer > session; each of the circuits go to a different POP. Each of the peer > sessions receive a partial routing table from our provider. What we have > found is that load sharing (outbound to our ISP) is virtually non-existant. > > > well, i'm studying for BCSN and came across the maximum path feature, and it > seems like the solution. > > My question is this: we have enabled maximum-path 4 to load share between > the four sessions. This, however has had a neglible effect. Does the fact > that we still hear routes from the provider from different pops affect this? > > In other words, since the 4 pops are in a different geographical area, and > therefore may send a different bgp table which in turns overrides the > maximum path command. > > I want to try having the provider send a default route instead; the thought > being that our router will not have to decide on best paths, and leave that > to ISP router, but the powers to be don't want that (for some reason...) > > Does anyone have any suggestions? > thanks all, > > moe > > > > > > > _ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6890&t=6887 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
study material for CSIDS 2.0 Beta Exam [7:6891]
Cisco Guru's Can any one suggest study material for CSIDS 2.0 Beta Exam or point a URL. Thanks in advance . Best regards Naveen Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6891&t=6891 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OFF TOPIC: Californai Wants You! [7:6892]
January 2000 Love my new job here in Silicon Valley. My salary is 30% higher! I have stock options! The temperature outside is 65F in winter! California is the best place on earth!!! Sure glad I moved out here. February Still looking for an apartment. Freeways everywhere to take you places. Love California! March Found a 1-bedroom apartment for $1900/mo. California is a bit more expensive than I thought. April Gas hit $2.29/gal. Somebody stole the gas from my car. That sucks May A small earthquake! And this is what everyone was so worried about? Almost didn't feel it. June A forest fire and a mud slide near LA. Who cares, that is far away from me! July A big earthquake... Spent 4 hours in my bathtub. Boy, that was scary. Glad we didn't have no stinking earthquakes where I grew up. August Drought! They turn on the water once a day. This sucks big time! Somebody stole the water from my car's radiator. Why did I come to California? September Decided to buy a house. Found a 2-bedroom fixer-upper for $800K. Borrowed against my stock options for down payment. Freeway traffic is worse. Today it took nearly two hours to get to and from work...each way. October My startup fired 90% of the work force, including me. The stock lost 98% of its value. My options are underwater. November Had to sell my house. Couldn't make the payments. Found a studio apartment for $2300/mo. The traffic is unbearable December Problems with electricity. They turn the electricity off several times a day. It's called "rolling blackouts." Somebody stole my car battery...what do I do now? January 2001 I'm typing this, stuck in an elevator, in complete darkness. The battery of my laptop is dying. Silicon Valley is no more. Angry hordes of former dot-commers are looting in the dark. It was fun while it lasted. I'm coming back home tomorrow. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6892&t=6892 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
I agree with you. It's awful easy for someone who's already gotten their CCIE (which when they passed the lab probably could be quoted as saying something like "that was the most difficult thing I've ever seen") to now say "Sure.. make it as difficult as possible " I don't know many CCIEs personally. Only a couple, and both of them said that given the time constraints of the lab (2 days), it is extremely difficult. So I don't think jamming it into 1 day just because Cisco is too cheap to spring for more testing centers to keep up with demand is a "resonable solution". Isn't this why Cisco is contemplating making it 1 day? Not to "raise the bar" of the level of the exam, but simply because they're testing centers can't handle the demand. Mashing into 1 day, IMHO, would be a very poor decision. Agreeing with Brad, do all of the CCIEs that are out there have a problem with leaving the bar where it was when you passed it? It only seems fair. Mike W. "Bradley J. Wilson" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > If I weren't up to the challenge, I wouldn't be on this newsgroup. Are you > up to the challenge of leaving the bar at the same height that it was when > *you* passed the test? I personally think the test is difficult enough as > it is. Am I a wimp because of that? Do we need to dump some dirt on the > top of Everest now that it's been conquered by someone else ahead of me? > > If Cisco wants to make the test "tougher," they're well within their rights > to do so. I just hope they don't call it the "CCIE" - call it something > different, and reset the numbers to zero (or 1025, whichever). > > > > > - Original Message - > From: Louie Belt > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:33 AM > Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > Any CCIE or CCIE candidate worth his salt would want the lab to be tougher. > A number of study aids are now available that were not in the past. This > has somewhat lessened the difficulty of the process (as witnessed by the > backlog of people taking the lab after breezing through the written). > Making it tougher is just a method of counterbalancing all of the increased > study aids and maintaining the value of the CCIE cert. > > If you truly want to obtain your CCIE then you should want it to be as > difficult as possible, otherwise where is the value in the cert? If you are > not up to the challenge, then don't make the attempt. > > As for who should evaluate the CCIE program - most (not all)employers > couldn't begin to answer the questions about what is needed from a CCIE. > The biggest employer of CCIE's is Cisco (by far) so they should already have > an idea of what is needed. Cisco has been respectful enough of the CCIE > population to also ask for their input and most have given it willingly. > > My main interested is in preserving the value of the CCIE cert. I am > currently studying for my 2nd CCIE cert and still hope they make it tougher > (before I complete it). I also hope they make the recertification tests > tougher as well. > > I'm up to the challenge - are you? > > > Louie > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Bradley J. Wilson > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 3:11 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > Forgive my cynicism, but any CCIE *would* want the lab to be tougher - they > would know that any CCIEs that came along after they received their number > increase the supply, thus lowering the cost of the good. ;-) > > I think Cisco ought to be asking companies who *hire* CCIEs what skills > *they* would like to see in those who carry the CCIE certification - not the > number-carrying CCIEs themselves. > > BJ > > P.S. And while I'm feeling cynical...can we please move the "NT vs. UNIX" > nonsense to private emails or perhaps a different mail list? Thenks. > > > - Original Message - > From: Belt, Louie > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 2:15 PM > Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > I filled out my survey and told them I wanted it to stay a two day lab - > and if anything - make it tougher. The explosion of materials available to > help people get though the written and prepare for the lab has taken some of > the challenge out of the process in my opinion. I would prefer they keep it > a 2 day lab, make it mean as h*** and keep the prestige in the cert. I also > told them I did not want them to stop issuing the medal for those who > succeed. > > Louie > > -Original Message- > From: CCIE Wanna BE > To: Belt, Louie; '[EMAIL PROTECTED] ' > Sent: 6/1/01 8:23 AM > Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > So what is everyone's take? > --- "Belt, Louie" wrote: > > That is simply one possible solution. They have > > sent a survey out to all of > > the CCIE's to get their feedback and suggesti
Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? [7:6896]
In case you haven't noticed, most CCNA books point out the fact that the IOS uses a "Unix-ish" shell, with command line completion, etc. just like Unix. Some of the low end equipment, like the 700 series and the 1900s allow you to use a web interface, but virtually everything else is command line. Can you provide facts showing that the IOS *isn't* Unix-ish? Perhaps Cisco is working on a GUI, (don't flame me for this ... it's a joke), they're working on a GUI so all the NT admins can have a chance at becoming Cisco gurus =) Mike W. (former NT admin) "Jason" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Oh, now the IOS is Unixish ?? Phew, so by that token, all Unix experts would > be CCIE... so I guess the number would include all the so call Unix/Linux > "experts" > I don't remember mentioning that the ATM runs NT, most of them actually run > OS2. The extra $$ you save from using open?? source OS would be waste on > support > > In case you have not notice, Cisco is working on a GUI > > > > ""Kelly Hair"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > "Jason" - > > > > By your logic, Windows NT 3.1 is all you need for your Enterprise to > > succeed. Good luck in that endevour! > > > > In response to your other point, yes, I would trust my ATM server to > Linux. > > The blue screen is pretty but I would prefer to have money instead. Oh.. > > not to mention the extra money I would have from using a an open source OS > > rather than an M$ one... > > > > Perhaps Cisco should throw out the Unixish IOS and replace it with a GUI > so > > everyone could write configs for routers. Sounds like a grand idea... > > > > Regards, > > Kelly > > > > > What was your point ? That Multics sucks , and by the same token, > > > therefore Unix sucks and NT/W2K rules !!! At least, NT/W2K was based on > > > a working operating system. Anyone of you notice that Unix is all about > > > ego ? If Unix is finished in 1 month, why are there still people > > > working on it ? On the other hand, if Unix is perfect, why the hell are > > > people working on it ? If Unix promotes innovation, why is nobody using > > > it ? Would you trust you ATM machine to Linux ? > > > > > > > > > > > > ""Jim Dixon"" wrote in message > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > >> THE PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE B > > >> > > >> ABSTRACT > > >> B is a computer language designed by D. M. Ritchie and K. L. Thompson, > > >> for primarily non-numeric applications such as system programming. > > >> These typically involve complex logical decision-making, and > > >> processing of integers, characters, and bit strings. On the H6070 TSS > > >> system, B programs are usually much easier to write and understand > > >> than assembly language programs, and object code efficiency is almost > > >> as good. Implementation of simple TSS subsystems is an especially > > >> appropriate use for B. This > > > technical > > >> report contains a description of the MH-TSS (Honeywell 6070) version > > >> of B (by S. C. Johnson), and a tutorial introduction to most of the > > >> features of the language (by B. W. Kernighan). > > >> > > >> Ken Thompson > > >> The principal inventor of the Unix operating system and author of > > >> the B language, the predecessor of C. > > >> > > >> In the early days Ken used to hand-cut Unix distribution tapes, often > > >> with > > > a > > >> note that read "Love, ken". Old-timers still use his first name > > >> (sometimes uncapitalised, because it's a login name and mail address) > > >> in third-person reference; it is widely understood (on Usenet in > > >> particular) that without > > > a > > >> last name "Ken" refers only to Ken Thompson. Similarly, Dennis without > > > last > > >> name means Dennis Ritchie (and he is often known as dmr). > > >> > > >> Ken was first hired to work on the Multics project, which was a huge > > >> production with many people working on it. Multics was supposed to > > >> support hundreds of on-line logins but could barely handle three. > > >> > > >> In 1969, when Bell Labs withdrew from the project, Ken got fed up with > > >> Multics and went off to write his own operating system. People said > > >> "well, if zillions of people wrote Multics, then an OS written by one > > >> guy must be Unix!". There was some joking about eunichs as well. > > >> > > >> Ken's wife Bonnie and son Corey (then 18 months old) went to visit > > >> family > > > in > > >> San Diego. Ken spent one week each on the kernel, file system, etc., > > >> and finished UNIX in one month along with developing SPACEWAR (or was > > >> it > > > "Space > > >> Travel"?). > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -Original Message- > > >> From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > >> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 5:40 PM > > >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >> Subject: RE: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? > > >> [7:6675] > > >> > > >> > > >> >Want to make any UNIX-h
Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? [7:6897]
Jason - Once again... for the reading impared: Cisco IOS is Unixish. Did I state that it IS Unix? Where do you suppose Cisco came up with the idea of the Internetworking Operating System? Please do not tell me MS-DOS, PC-DOS, Logo or some other crap... Commands like finger, who, telnet, history may seem foreign to you but they have Unix origins... If only IOS incorporated grep, sed and awk then life would be a little nicer (and no... the inc/begin/exclude in >= 12.0 does not count...) Regarding your barb on Unix experts should be CCIEs - by the same token we should could also state that all NT admins are on the same level as all script kiddies... Please... there are some good/great NT admins out there who are very technical. You never answered the Windows 3.1 AS question... Would you trust your Enterprise to this? There are Unix systems that are still running from that um.. time period. For some fun reading, Jason, check out http://www.sciam.com/1998/1198issue/1198techbus2.html Perhaps the link is a little old but it is one example of how many organizations are attempting to use Windows NT in the Enterprise. Hopefully, the IRS does not... Then again, 4 billion later and they still have problems perhaps that could be their new answer. If only that flat tax would pass... sigh... If Cisco is working on a GUI then they are going the same path as Lucent and others before them. I cannot wait until the know it all manager configures the network and does not understand why it doesn't work... I mean.. all the pretty lines with a thunderbolt connected to a ring here and a bar there... Guess there will always be work for IT folks :) One last thing.. could you send me some mail offline from this mailing list? You are listed as an anonymous poster and I would love to continue this conversation in a more private forum. Regards, Kelly - Original Message - From: "Jason" To: Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 3:14 AM Subject: Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? [7:6859] > Oh, now the IOS is Unixish ?? Phew, so by that token, all Unix experts would > be CCIE... so I guess the number would include all the so call Unix/Linux > "experts" > I don't remember mentioning that the ATM runs NT, most of them actually run > OS2. The extra $$ you save from using open?? source OS would be waste on > support > > In case you have not notice, Cisco is working on a GUI > > > > ""Kelly Hair"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > "Jason" - > > > > By your logic, Windows NT 3.1 is all you need for your Enterprise to > > succeed. Good luck in that endevour! > > > > In response to your other point, yes, I would trust my ATM server to > Linux. > > The blue screen is pretty but I would prefer to have money instead. Oh.. > > not to mention the extra money I would have from using a an open source OS > > rather than an M$ one... > > > > Perhaps Cisco should throw out the Unixish IOS and replace it with a GUI > so > > everyone could write configs for routers. Sounds like a grand idea... > > > > Regards, > > Kelly > > > > > What was your point ? That Multics sucks , and by the same token, > > > therefore Unix sucks and NT/W2K rules !!! At least, NT/W2K was based on > > > a working operating system. Anyone of you notice that Unix is all about > > > ego ? If Unix is finished in 1 month, why are there still people > > > working on it ? On the other hand, if Unix is perfect, why the hell are > > > people working on it ? If Unix promotes innovation, why is nobody using > > > it ? Would you trust you ATM machine to Linux ? > > > > > > > > > > > > ""Jim Dixon"" wrote in message > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > >> THE PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE B > > >> > > >> ABSTRACT > > >> B is a computer language designed by D. M. Ritchie and K. L. Thompson, > > >> for primarily non-numeric applications such as system programming. > > >> These typically involve complex logical decision-making, and > > >> processing of integers, characters, and bit strings. On the H6070 TSS > > >> system, B programs are usually much easier to write and understand > > >> than assembly language programs, and object code efficiency is almost > > >> as good. Implementation of simple TSS subsystems is an especially > > >> appropriate use for B. This > > > technical > > >> report contains a description of the MH-TSS (Honeywell 6070) version > > >> of B (by S. C. Johnson), and a tutorial introduction to most of the > > >> features of the language (by B. W. Kernighan). > > >> > > >> Ken Thompson > > >> The principal inventor of the Unix operating system and author of > > >> the B language, the predecessor of C. > > >> > > >> In the early days Ken used to hand-cut Unix distribution tapes, often > > >> with > > > a > > >> note that read "Love, ken". Old-timers still use his first name > > >> (sometimes uncapitalised, because it's a login name and mail address) > > >> in third-perso
Looking for memory specs for 4000-M [7:6898]
OK I'm getting a little frustrated this morning. I have been searching the archives and CCO with no luck. I just got a 4000-M without any memory and I'm trying to come up with memory for it. Can anyone tell me or point me towards the memory specifications for a 4000-M? All I can seem to find on CCO is how much memory I can cram into this guy; not what memory is compatible. Also if anyone has some DRAM for a 4000-M they want to sell, I'd be interested. thanks, tm Tim Medley Network Architect VoIP Group iReadyWorld Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6898&t=6898 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TCP Sliding Windows question [7:6899]
I am reading Doug Comer's excellent book Internetworking with TCP/IP vol 1. Highly recommended, and I wish I had followed the good advice of several other people on this list, and read the book a year ago. I have a question on sliding windows as Comer describes it: "The TCP sliding window mechanism operates at the octet level, not at the segment or packet level" Comer goes on to describe the operation of the mechanism, and indicates that acknowledgements occur octet for octet. This strikes me as highly inefficient, and something that would render TCP unusable in networks of any size. Because acknowledgements are based on sequence numbers, there would have to be a TCP header for every octet. Not good at all. I am no doubt missing something fundamental here. Perhaps TCP stack implementations are written in such a way that the "octets" being sent and acknowledge via the sliding window mechanism are really segments / packets? I.e. hundreds of octets at a time? Can someone enlighten me? Chuck One IOS to forward them all. One IOS to find them. One IOS to summarize them all And in the routing table bind them. -JRR Chambers- Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6899&t=6899 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
traffic can't cross pix [7:6895]
I have this problem. I can't ping anything outside the pix from machines inside. Pix inside IP is the default gateway for all the machines & they can ping the gateway. I can also ping outside world from pix. What is causing this problem...? I have pasted pix configs below. this is new pix & it never worked before. I have seen identical pix configs working earlier. thanks_ PIX Version 5.2(3) nameif ethernet0 outside security0 nameif ethernet1 inside security100 hostname pix-con fixup protocol ftp 21 fixup protocol http 80 fixup protocol h323 1720 fixup protocol rsh 514 fixup protocol smtp 25 fixup protocol sqlnet 1521 fixup protocol sip 5060 names access-list 101 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.100.0 255.255.255.0 access-list 102 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.100.0 255.255.255.0 access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.231 eq www access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.227 eq smtp access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.228 eq pop3 access-list check permit icmp any any pager lines 24 logging on no logging timestamp no logging standby no logging console no logging monitor logging buffered warnings no logging trap no logging history logging facility 20 logging queue 512 interface ethernet0 auto interface ethernet1 auto mtu outside 1500 mtu inside 1500 ip address outside 212.19.133.226 255.255.255.240 ip address inside 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 ip audit info action alarm ip audit attack action alarm arp timeout 14400 global (outside) 1 interface nat (inside) 0 access-list 101 nat (inside) 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.227 192.168.0.2 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.228 192.168.0.3 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.231 192.168.0.4 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 access-group check in interface outside route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 212.19.133.225 1 timeout xlate 3:00:00 timeout conn 1:00:00 half-closed 0:10:00 udp 0:02:00 rpc 0:10:00 h323 0:05:00 si p 0:30:00 sip_media 0:02:00 timeout uauth 0:05:00 absolute aaa-server TACACS+ protocol tacacs+ aaa-server RADIUS protocol radius no snmp-server location no snmp-server contact snmp-server community public no snmp-server enable traps floodguard enable sysopt connection permit-ipsec no sysopt route dnat crypto ipsec transform-set standard esp-des esp-md5-hmac crypto map peer_map 10 ipsec-isakmp crypto map peer_map 10 match address 102 crypto map peer_map 10 set peer 212.46.19.194 crypto map peer_map 10 set transform-set standard isakmp enable outside isakmp key l9k834 address 212.46.19.194 netmask 255.255.255.255 isakmp identity address isakmp policy 10 authentication pre-share isakmp policy 10 encryption des isakmp policy 10 hash md5 isakmp policy 10 group 1 isakmp policy 10 lifetime 3600 telnet 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 inside telnet timeout 15 terminal width 80 __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ PIX Version 5.2(3) nameif ethernet0 outside security0 nameif ethernet1 inside security100 hostname pix-con fixup protocol ftp 21 fixup protocol http 80 fixup protocol h323 1720 fixup protocol rsh 514 fixup protocol smtp 25 fixup protocol sqlnet 1521 fixup protocol sip 5060 names access-list 101 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.100.0 255.255.255.0 access-list 102 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.100.0 255.255.255.0 access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.231 eq www access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.227 eq smtp access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.228 eq pop3 access-list check permit icmp any any pager lines 24 logging on no logging timestamp no logging standby no logging console no logging monitor logging buffered warnings no logging trap no logging history logging facility 20 logging queue 512 interface ethernet0 auto interface ethernet1 auto mtu outside 1500 mtu inside 1500 ip address outside 212.19.133.226 255.255.255.240 ip address inside 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 ip audit info action alarm ip audit attack action alarm arp timeout 14400 global (outside) 1 interface nat (inside) 0 access-list 101 nat (inside) 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.227 192.168.0.2 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.228 192.168.0.3 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.231 192.168.0.4 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 access-group check in interface outside route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 212.19.133.225 1 timeout xlate 3:00:00 timeout conn 1:00:00 half-closed 0:10:00 udp 0:02:00 rpc 0:10:00 h323 0:05:00 si p 0:30:00 sip_media 0:02:00 timeout uauth 0:05:00 absolute aaa-server TACACS+ protocol tacacs+ aaa-server RADIUS protocol radius no snmp-server location no snmp-server contact snmp-server community public no snmp-server enable traps floodguard enable sysopt connection permi
RE: where has the bible or dump for 504? [7:6883]
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, McCallum, Robert wrote: > Unless my English has totally left me I reckon you might need to elaborate > slightly as I do not have a clue what you are on about! My guess is that he's looking for a braindump for 640-504. > -Original Message- > From: samuel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 02 June 2001 16:30 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: where has the bible or dump for 504? [7:6883] > > anybody know it ,please tell me -- "Someone approached me and asked me to teach a javascript course. I was about to decline, saying that my complete ignorance of the subject made me unsuitable, then I thought again, that maybe it doesn't, as driving people away from it is a desirable outcome." --Me Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6894&t=6883 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to configure 1601 to load balance 2 Internet circuits [7:6900]
I have a customer that has a 128k connection to the Internet and they are bringing in a T1 to the Internet but they want to load balance on both circuits for a week to be sure the new circuit is working properly. What is the simpliest way to configure this scenario? Can I set multiple last resort gateways or what? Please help! Thanks everyone! Justin Lofton Account Executive/CCNA Tredent Data Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] V: (818) 222-3770 F: (818) 222-3778 http://www.tredent.com/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6900&t=6900 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TR card what is it? [7:6902]
I have this Token Ring card and I don't know what it is. Can you look at it and let me know. Thanks. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~johnec/tr.html Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6902&t=6902 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
I'm a little puzzled by all this. Certifications are fine, but they are a beginning, not an end. Now, I freely admit I'm in an odd position. As far as I am concerned, I met the equivalent difficulty of CCIE in the pre-1975 CCSI program, which was radically different. I can't see my career advancement being improved in the slightest by having a CCIE, because I have credentials that are worth more to me. Now that Cisco is so aggressive against study sites, I've made a conscious decision not to get a CCIE so I can't be accused of NDA violations. Yet I think my record is sufficient to demonstrate I believe in helping people getting CCIE and lesser certificates. But I do believe that at some point, certification is enough. Even in medicine, you go through National Boards, then usually the boards for family practice or a primary specialty, maybe a specialty like cardiology or infectious disease that does have a certification, but even fellowship training beyond that doesn't have "certification" requirements. There may be a need to take a certain amount of continuing education courses. But the real credentials come with doing, and that can be in an assortment of areas. I've designed some big and complex networks, but now work more on protocol performance and product design (and no, I can't get into what I'm working on). But one indication might be my most active IETF activity on BGP router convergence, the new edition of which will be coauthored by Nortel, Cisco, Nexthop, and Juniper. Participating in professional societies is a real thing you can do, and don't tell me it's too difficult. Local groups of IEEE, ACM, etc., meet locally, as do many user groups. Most of the IETF and NANOG work is done on open mailing lists, although it does help to go to meetings. Presenting your more interesting designs and troubleshooting can fall into professional activities, mentoring programs, etc. Trade and professional journals always are looking for contributors. You think having three or four or five pages of publications and presentations doesn't help your resume? Guess again. When it comes to passing exams, there is a point at which I remember the technical term used for the dumbest medical student that passes through school: doctor. Make the CCIE lab more difficult? With more unrealistic rules like don't use static routes when they are appropriate design? Keep trying to show complex phenomena with six routers that really might not show up before sixty? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6901&t=6735 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TCP Sliding Windows question [7:6899]
TCP sequences bytes. A lot of people assume that TCP sequences packets or segments, but that's not true. The sequence number in a TCP header is the sequence number of the first byte in the payload. It's not a segment number. The ACK is the number of the next byte of payload expected. It's not a segment number. The sliding window keeps track of how many bytes have been sent and acknowledged. The 3-way handshake kind of breaks this rule, which is probably why people get confused. They never go past the 3-way handshake. With the 3-way handshake, there are no payload bytes. The recipient's ACK number is nonetheless one more than the other side's SEQ number. Follow the sequence number and ACKs in the following trace, after you get past the 3-way handshake in packets 1-3: 1 MyPCServer TCP HTTPS= 2821020, L=0, A= 0 2 Server MyPCTCP HTTPS=2134278484, L=0, A= 2821021 3 MyPCServer TCP HTTPS= 2821021, L=0, A=2134278485 4 MyPCServer TCP HTTPS= 2821021, L= 384, A=2134278485 5 Server MyPCTCP HTTPS=2134278485, L=0, A= 2821405 6 Server MyPCTCP HTTPS=2134278485, L= 156, A= 2821405 7 MyPCServer TCP HTTPS= 2821405, L=0, A=2134278641 8 MyPCServer TCP HTTPS= 2821405, L= 304, A=2134278641 9 Server MyPCTCP HTTPS=2134278641, L=0, A= 2821709 10 Server MyPCTCP HTTPS=2134278641, L= 156, A= 2821709 11 MyPCServer TCP HTTPS= 2821709, L=0, A=2134278797 Priscilla At 02:10 PM 6/2/01, Chuck Larrieu wrote: >I am reading Doug Comer's excellent book Internetworking with TCP/IP vol 1. >Highly recommended, and I wish I had followed the good advice of several >other people on this list, and read the book a year ago. > >I have a question on sliding windows as Comer describes it: "The TCP sliding >window mechanism operates at the octet level, not at the segment or packet >level" Comer goes on to describe the operation of the mechanism, and >indicates that acknowledgements occur octet for octet. > >This strikes me as highly inefficient, and something that would render TCP >unusable in networks of any size. Because acknowledgements are based on >sequence numbers, there would have to be a TCP header for every octet. Not >good at all. > >I am no doubt missing something fundamental here. Perhaps TCP stack >implementations are written in such a way that the "octets" being sent and >acknowledge via the sliding window mechanism are really segments / packets? >I.e. hundreds of octets at a time? > >Can someone enlighten me? > >Chuck > >One IOS to forward them all. >One IOS to find them. >One IOS to summarize them all >And in the routing table bind them. > >-JRR Chambers- Priscilla Oppenheimer http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6904&t=6899 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: show trunk command doesn't work on my switch [7:6858]
Arun, I'm not completely sure, but I think that you have to run 12.0 or higher to do trunking on a router. You might want to double check that though.In the mean time, here are examples of a working trunking config on a 2924XL that I work with and the complementing router config. Switch... switchport access vlan 1 switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q (you would use isl instead) switchport mode trunk Router... interface FastEthernet0/0 no ip address no ip directed-broadcast speed 100 full-duplex ! interface FastEthernet0/0.1 description Management encapsulation dot1q 1 ip address 10.1.0.1 255.255.255.0 no ip directed-broadcast Hope this helps, Karen *** REPLY SEPARATOR *** On 6/2/2001 at 3:10 AM Arun wrote: >Hi >i am trying to set up trunking between 2900-xl and 7000 series router all >other commands for the trunking work but show trunk is not there >why..i configured it like this can anybody help > >I am facing problem in setting the isl trunk between 29900xL series switch >and 7100 series router .The configuration is like i am using fast ethernet >port 0/16 of switch for trunk . >i configure it using commands as below for the switch i do.. > >conf t >int vlan 1 >ip adress 192.168.3.215 255.255.255.0 >ip default-gateway 192.168.3.210 > >conf ter >int fast eth0/16 >switchport mode trunk >switchport trunk encapsulation isl(right ) >swicthport trunk allowed vlan all >conf ter >int fast0/15 >switchport access vlan 2 >spannig portfast >exit >also i did like >vlan database >vtp server >vlan 2 > >now for the router >conf t >int fast0/0 >no shutdown >exit >int fast0/0.1 >encap isl 1 >ip add 192.168 .3.210 255.255.255.0 >exit >int fast0/0.2 >encap isl 2 >ip add 192.168 .4.210 255.255.255.0 >exit > >the show ver shows 11.2(8)..rest of the commmands work .. am i forgetting >anything >..do i need to use something like set trunk mode on or negotiate for it to >work ... >..also after this if i do >show cdp neigh the router see the switch but if i do it on switch it doesn't >see the router ..please help . >where i am doing wrong ..Please help >Thanx in advance > > >Regards >Arun Sharma Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6903&t=6858 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
reverse telnet... [7:6906]
Hello Guys / Ladies, I am trying to get reverse telnet configured on a 2511. I have 7 other routers connected via an asyn scsi cable. all seems to be well but still can not get it going. can not telnet to other router via the access server. If anyone has quick and dirty notes on this configuration, I would appreciate it if you can email it to me ... Thanks a lot _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6906&t=6906 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BGP -Maximum Paths [7:6887]
It seems that if you are only getting partial routes from each of the connections, you are probably using your gateway of last resort for most of your outbound traffic. When you enabled the maximum-paths, you enabled load balancing for the partial routes you are getting, but again, that is probably not what most of your traffic is going to. I would then configure 4 default gateways, one for each T1. You should then load-distribute per-desiccation/per-session. Thanks -Nate "moe humm" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hey gang, > > I have a question on maximum-paths in BGP; > > This is the scenario: 4 T1's running EBGP to our ISP in a multihome peer > session; each of the circuits go to a different POP. Each of the peer > sessions receive a partial routing table from our provider. What we have > found is that load sharing (outbound to our ISP) is virtually non-existant. > > > well, i'm studying for BCSN and came across the maximum path feature, and it > seems like the solution. > > My question is this: we have enabled maximum-path 4 to load share between > the four sessions. This, however has had a neglible effect. Does the fact > that we still hear routes from the provider from different pops affect this? > > In other words, since the 4 pops are in a different geographical area, and > therefore may send a different bgp table which in turns overrides the > maximum path command. > > I want to try having the provider send a default route instead; the thought > being that our router will not have to decide on best paths, and leave that > to ISP router, but the powers to be don't want that (for some reason...) > > Does anyone have any suggestions? > thanks all, > > moe > > > > > > > _ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6907&t=6887 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: reverse telnet... [7:6906]
hello jimmy, try something like this: interface loopback 0 ip address 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.255 ! line 1 16 no exec transport input all To reverse telnet: 192.168.0.1 2001 Thank you, Mike Nygard ""jimmy halbert"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hello Guys / Ladies, > I am trying to get reverse telnet configured on a 2511. I have 7 other > routers connected via an asyn scsi cable. all seems to be well but still can > not get it going. can not telnet to other router via the access server. If > anyone has quick and dirty notes on this configuration, I would appreciate > it if you can email it to me ... > > Thanks a lot > _ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6908&t=6906 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
"This has somewhat lessened the difficulty of the process (as witnessed by the backlog of people taking the lab after breezing through the written)." When the "junior certs" were introduced, it was pondered whether they should be a pre-requisite to the CCIE written or as I have read before - make the CCNP/CCDP the pre-requisite for the lab. On a FAQ at one time, Cisco said that "eventually" the CCIE would become part of the career certification track which was to say that you would need to go through the junior certs before attempting the CCIE. With the onslaught of new study material, bootcamps, virtual racks et al, I think it is time that the CCIE written be retired and the CCNP/CCDP be the CCIE lab authorization. Or, because the CCIE written still has stuff that is not talked about much any more (if at all) in the current R/S curriculum, then a smaller CCIE written to cover those topics but integrate it into the present career track. CCNA - CCNP/CCDP - CCIE Written - CCIE lab. This way, we could get rid of the idea of passing one exam and then clogging the calendar for the CCIE lab. If you have to get from 4 - 7 exams before the lab, that would perhaps slow things down and maybe (just maybe) increase the success rate at the lab. Hopefully this would stave off any loss of respect for the cert and perhaps even increase it. Kevin Wigle - Original Message - From: "Louie Belt" To: Sent: Saturday, 02 June, 2001 09:33 Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > Any CCIE or CCIE candidate worth his salt would want the lab to be tougher. > A number of study aids are now available that were not in the past. This > has somewhat lessened the difficulty of the process (as witnessed by the > backlog of people taking the lab after breezing through the written). > Making it tougher is just a method of counterbalancing all of the increased > study aids and maintaining the value of the CCIE cert. > > If you truly want to obtain your CCIE then you should want it to be as > difficult as possible, otherwise where is the value in the cert? If you are > not up to the challenge, then don't make the attempt. > > As for who should evaluate the CCIE program - most (not all)employers > couldn't begin to answer the questions about what is needed from a CCIE. > The biggest employer of CCIE's is Cisco (by far) so they should already have > an idea of what is needed. Cisco has been respectful enough of the CCIE > population to also ask for their input and most have given it willingly. > > My main interested is in preserving the value of the CCIE cert. I am > currently studying for my 2nd CCIE cert and still hope they make it tougher > (before I complete it). I also hope they make the recertification tests > tougher as well. > > I'm up to the challenge - are you? > > > Louie Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6909&t=6735 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: PC to PC thru 2 routers??? [7:6877]
Routing Protocol Use a classless routing protocol Ahmed ""Bob Lepine"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hi, I'm Bob, a computer trainer. I have a lab set up with 2 PCs with 2 > routers between, a 3600 and 2600. I have both end PCs on a 192.168.0.0 > network going through my e0/1 between routers on a 10.0.0 nw. I can ping > from router to router, but not from router to the outer PCs., nor of course > can I ping from outer pc to outer pc. Is there something I'm not considering > right? > > > -- > Bob Lepine > MCSE,MCDBA,CNA,CCNA,MCT Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6910&t=6877 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How to configure 1601 to load balance 2 Internet circuits [7:6911]
Hello Justin, The easiest way to resolve this would be to use multiple default routes from global configuration: ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 The router will load balance between the 2 routes. Thank you, Mike Nygard ""Justin Lofton"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I have a customer that has a 128k connection to the Internet and they are > bringing in a T1 to the Internet but they want to load balance on both > circuits for a week to be sure the new circuit is working properly. What is > the simpliest way to configure this scenario? Can I set multiple last > resort gateways or what? Please help! > > Thanks everyone! > > Justin Lofton > Account Executive/CCNA > Tredent Data Systems > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > V: (818) 222-3770 > F: (818) 222-3778 > http://www.tredent.com/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6911&t=6911 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BGP -Maximum Paths [7:6887]
can you post a config Moe? would help to track down exactly what's going on thanks Andy - Original Message - From: "moe humm" To: Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 5:01 PM Subject: BGP -Maximum Paths [7:6887] > Hey gang, > > I have a question on maximum-paths in BGP; > > This is the scenario: 4 T1's running EBGP to our ISP in a multihome peer > session; each of the circuits go to a different POP. Each of the peer > sessions receive a partial routing table from our provider. What we have > found is that load sharing (outbound to our ISP) is virtually non-existant. > > > well, i'm studying for BCSN and came across the maximum path feature, and it > seems like the solution. > > My question is this: we have enabled maximum-path 4 to load share between > the four sessions. This, however has had a neglible effect. Does the fact > that we still hear routes from the provider from different pops affect this? > > In other words, since the 4 pops are in a different geographical area, and > therefore may send a different bgp table which in turns overrides the > maximum path command. > > I want to try having the provider send a default route instead; the thought > being that our router will not have to decide on best paths, and leave that > to ISP router, but the powers to be don't want that (for some reason...) > > Does anyone have any suggestions? > thanks all, > > moe > > > > > > > _ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6912&t=6887 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: traffic can't cross pix [7:6895]
Hi Pat, Just so you don't think you're being ignored, I've sifted through every line, as much as anything to convert myself to the newer commands for the pix. I'm stuck as well. Can't see anything wrong with the config. I take it you already did a clear xlate/reload. What does show xlate give you. Let us know the outcome. Gaz ""pat"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >I have this problem. I can't ping anything outside > the pix from machines inside. Pix inside IP is the > default gateway for all the machines & they can ping > the gateway. I can also ping outside world from pix. > What is causing this problem...? I have pasted pix > configs below. this is new pix & it never worked > before. I have seen identical pix configs working > earlier. > > thanks_ > > > > > PIX Version 5.2(3) > nameif ethernet0 outside security0 > nameif ethernet1 inside security100 > hostname pix-con > fixup protocol ftp 21 > fixup protocol http 80 > fixup protocol h323 1720 > fixup protocol rsh 514 > fixup protocol smtp 25 > fixup protocol sqlnet 1521 > fixup protocol sip 5060 > names > access-list 101 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 > 192.168.100.0 255.255.255.0 > access-list 102 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 > 192.168.100.0 255.255.255.0 > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.231 > eq www > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.227 > eq smtp > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.228 > eq pop3 > access-list check permit icmp any any > pager lines 24 > logging on > no logging timestamp > no logging standby > no logging console > no logging monitor > logging buffered warnings > no logging trap > no logging history > logging facility 20 > logging queue 512 > interface ethernet0 auto > interface ethernet1 auto > mtu outside 1500 > mtu inside 1500 > ip address outside 212.19.133.226 255.255.255.240 > ip address inside 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 > ip audit info action alarm > ip audit attack action alarm > arp timeout 14400 > global (outside) 1 interface > nat (inside) 0 access-list 101 > nat (inside) 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 > static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.227 192.168.0.2 > netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 > static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.228 192.168.0.3 > netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 > static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.231 192.168.0.4 > netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 > access-group check in interface outside > route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 212.19.133.225 1 > timeout xlate 3:00:00 > timeout conn 1:00:00 half-closed 0:10:00 udp 0:02:00 > rpc 0:10:00 h323 0:05:00 si > p 0:30:00 sip_media 0:02:00 > timeout uauth 0:05:00 absolute > aaa-server TACACS+ protocol tacacs+ > aaa-server RADIUS protocol radius > no snmp-server location > no snmp-server contact > snmp-server community public > no snmp-server enable traps > floodguard enable > sysopt connection permit-ipsec > no sysopt route dnat > crypto ipsec transform-set standard esp-des > esp-md5-hmac > crypto map peer_map 10 ipsec-isakmp > crypto map peer_map 10 match address 102 > crypto map peer_map 10 set peer 212.46.19.194 > crypto map peer_map 10 set transform-set standard > isakmp enable outside > isakmp key l9k834 address 212.46.19.194 netmask > 255.255.255.255 > isakmp identity address > isakmp policy 10 authentication pre-share > isakmp policy 10 encryption des > isakmp policy 10 hash md5 > isakmp policy 10 group 1 > isakmp policy 10 lifetime 3600 > telnet 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 inside > telnet timeout 15 > terminal width 80 > > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > PIX Version 5.2(3) > nameif ethernet0 outside security0 > nameif ethernet1 inside security100 > hostname pix-con > fixup protocol ftp 21 > fixup protocol http 80 > fixup protocol h323 1720 > fixup protocol rsh 514 > fixup protocol smtp 25 > fixup protocol sqlnet 1521 > fixup protocol sip 5060 > names > access-list 101 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.100.0 > 255.255.255.0 > access-list 102 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.100.0 > 255.255.255.0 > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.231 eq www > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.227 eq smtp > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.228 eq pop3 > access-list check permit icmp any any > pager lines 24 > logging on > no logging timestamp > no logging standby > no logging console > no logging monitor > logging buffered warnings > no logging trap > no logging history > logging facility 20 > logging queue 512 > interface ethernet0 auto > interface ethernet1 auto > mtu outside 1500 > mtu inside 1500 > ip address outside 212.19.133.226 255.255.255.240 > ip address inside 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 > ip audit info action alarm > ip audit attack action alarm > arp timeout 14400 > global (outside) 1 interface > nat (inside) 0 access-list 101 > nat (inside) 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 > st
RE: TCP Sliding Windows question [7:6899]
Thanks, PO. I should add that after I posted, I continued my reading, and a couple of pages later, Comer goes into a detailed explanation about how this works. Let me try to explain in my own words, and let's see if I "get it". Starting with me as a user. I want to download a Windows NT service pack - mucho megabytes. Before the file transfer actually begins, the TCP deamons on my PC and the Microsoft server agree on a window size. I'm going to use round numbers to male the math easier. We agree that the window size is 64K bytes - the server will send me 64K bytes before it expects an ack from me. Let's further say for argument's sake that the MTU throughout the network path is 1000 bytes. I'm also going to skip calculations involving headers and stuff because I want to keep this simple. But I do understand that TCP and IP header sizes are accounted for by the sending TCP deamon. OK, the window size is 64K bytes, and the packet size is going to be 1000 bytes. Therefore TCP can send 64 packets ( segments ) before expecting an ack. All right - file transfer begins. My machine receives the first packet. It sends an ack that tells the sender that of that 64K byte window, I have received bytes 1 through 1000. Now, suppose some packets arrive out of sequence. Let's say I receive packet 20 before I receive packet 19 ( of the 64 packets accounted for in the TCP window my ack tells the sender that I have received bytes20,001 through 21,000. If I never ack packet 19, ( or rather, the bytes contained within that stream ) then only packet 19 is retransmitted by the sender. The fact that a number of packets ( number of bytes ) can be sent before requiring acknowledgement makes the whole process a lot more efficient. That's where I got confused. For whatever reason I had come to believe that TCP acknowledged based on packets. I believe I understand this now. TCP operates on packets ( segments is the more correct term ) and acknowledges that it has received so many bytes out of the byte count indicated by the window size. Amazing how it makes sense when you 1) read the material and 2) apply a bit of thought. Thanks again Chuck -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Priscilla Oppenheimer Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 12:37 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: TCP Sliding Windows question [7:6899] TCP sequences bytes. A lot of people assume that TCP sequences packets or segments, but that's not true. The sequence number in a TCP header is the sequence number of the first byte in the payload. It's not a segment number. The ACK is the number of the next byte of payload expected. It's not a segment number. The sliding window keeps track of how many bytes have been sent and acknowledged. The 3-way handshake kind of breaks this rule, which is probably why people get confused. They never go past the 3-way handshake. With the 3-way handshake, there are no payload bytes. The recipient's ACK number is nonetheless one more than the other side's SEQ number. Follow the sequence number and ACKs in the following trace, after you get past the 3-way handshake in packets 1-3: 1 MyPCServer TCP HTTPS= 2821020, L=0, A= 0 2 Server MyPCTCP HTTPS=2134278484, L=0, A= 2821021 3 MyPCServer TCP HTTPS= 2821021, L=0, A=2134278485 4 MyPCServer TCP HTTPS= 2821021, L= 384, A=2134278485 5 Server MyPCTCP HTTPS=2134278485, L=0, A= 2821405 6 Server MyPCTCP HTTPS=2134278485, L= 156, A= 2821405 7 MyPCServer TCP HTTPS= 2821405, L=0, A=2134278641 8 MyPCServer TCP HTTPS= 2821405, L= 304, A=2134278641 9 Server MyPCTCP HTTPS=2134278641, L=0, A= 2821709 10 Server MyPCTCP HTTPS=2134278641, L= 156, A= 2821709 11 MyPCServer TCP HTTPS= 2821709, L=0, A=2134278797 Priscilla At 02:10 PM 6/2/01, Chuck Larrieu wrote: >I am reading Doug Comer's excellent book Internetworking with TCP/IP vol 1. >Highly recommended, and I wish I had followed the good advice of several >other people on this list, and read the book a year ago. > >I have a question on sliding windows as Comer describes it: "The TCP sliding >window mechanism operates at the octet level, not at the segment or packet >level" Comer goes on to describe the operation of the mechanism, and >indicates that acknowledgements occur octet for octet. > >This strikes me as highly inefficient, and something that would render TCP >unusable in networks of any size. Because acknowledgements are based on >sequence numbers, there would have to be a TCP header for every octet. Not >good at all. > >I am no doubt missing something fundamental here. Perhaps TCP stack >implementations are written in such a way that the "octets" being sent and >acknowledge via the sliding window mechan
Re: ethernet jam signal ? [7:5796]
At 10:07 AM 6/2/01, E Joseph wrote: >Priscilla, > What would a the resulting jam look like on a >sniffer trace?? If the jam signal is all ones, it would look like 0xFFs on a Sniffer. The jam doesn't have to be all ones, though. On old bus coax networks, it was actually rare to see the jam because by the time the jam happened the clocking was so messed up that the Sniffer had already stopped capturing and just reported a runt, CRC error, collision. On a network with repeaters (hubs), when the repeater detects a collision it sends a 96-bit jam composed of alternating ones and zeros, which would look like 0xAAs or 0x55s. That's easier to see. A lot of Sniffers don't capture bad frames or runts, so you wouldn't see any of these jams in those cases. Someone else may have some additional information. It's always been a question of mine also whether you can really see jams or not. Of course in networks where full-duplex switch ports have replaced hub ports, this is no longer relevant. Please send messages to the group, not to me. Thanks, Priscilla > Thank You, > Ed > > > >--- Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: > > When a transmitter detects a collision, the > > transmitter continues to send > > the preamble, (if the preamble has not completed), > > and also sends 32 > > additional bits, which are called a jam signal. The > > jam signal extends the > > duration of the collision event to ensure that all > > stations hear the > > collision. The contents of the jam can be any > > pattern that is not > > intentionally designed to be the 32-bit CRC value > > corresponding to the > > (partial) frame already transmitted. Most > > implementations send all ones. > > > > Completely sending the preamble and transmitting a > > jam signal guarantees > > that a signal stays on the media long enough for all > > transmitting stations > > involved in the collision to recognize the collision > > and react accordingly. > > > > Priscilla > > > > > > >On Thu, 24 May 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > > What is an "ethernet a jam signal" > > > > > > > > > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > > http://www.priscilla.com >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >__ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 >a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ Priscilla Oppenheimer http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6914&t=5796 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: TCP Sliding Windows question [7:6899]
At 02:31 PM 6/2/01, Chuck Larrieu wrote: >Thanks, PO. > >I should add that after I posted, I continued my reading, and a couple of >pages later, Comer goes into a detailed explanation about how this works. >Let me try to explain in my own words, and let's see if I "get it". > >Starting with me as a user. I want to download a Windows NT service pack - >mucho megabytes. > >Before the file transfer actually begins, the TCP deamons on my PC and the >Microsoft server agree on a window size. The two communicating stations do not agree on a window size. Each side has its own window size. A low-end PC might start with a small window size. A big UNIX ;-) server would likely start with a large window size. I took out the window size parameter in my example below to simplify matters, but my Windows 98 PC started with a window size of 8760 bytes. The server started with 17520 bytes. The window size is advertised in each packet. It specifies how many bytes the station is ready to receive at this time. It can slide closed as a station gets overwhelmed. Hopefully it slides back open as the station hands off bytes from its buffers to the application. >I'm going to use round numbers to >male the math easier. We agree that the window size is 64K bytes - the >server will send me 64K bytes before it expects an ack from me. Let's >further say for argument's sake that the MTU throughout the network path is >1000 bytes. I'm also going to skip calculations involving headers and stuff >because I want to keep this simple. But I do understand that TCP and IP >header sizes are accounted for by the sending TCP deamon. Each side specifies the size of the segment it can receive in the 3-way handshake. The Max Segment Size (MSS) is a TCP option, one of the few ever used. It does not count the TCP or IP header. In my example, both my PC and the server said the their maximum segment size was 1460 bytes. So, in that sense, they took into account the TCP and IP header sizes and understood the MTU, as you say. >OK, the window size is 64K bytes, and the packet size is going to be 1000 >bytes. Therefore TCP can send 64 packets ( segments ) before expecting an >ack. Segment size is 1000 bytes, OK. >All right - file transfer begins. My machine receives the first packet. It >sends an ack that tells the sender that of that 64K byte window, I have >received bytes 1 through 1000. There's no need to send an ACK yet if the window size is 64 K. >Now, suppose some packets arrive out of >sequence. Let's say I receive packet 20 before I receive packet 19 ( of the >64 packets accounted for in the TCP window my ack tells the sender that I >have received bytes20,001 through 21,000. If I never ack packet 19, ( or >rather, the bytes contained within that stream ) then only packet 19 is >retransmitted by the sender. Packets aren't numbered, so your wording is bugging me, and I don't think the concept is quite right either. The ACK specifies the byte I expect to receive next. It is a single number, not a range. If bytes are missing, I have to keep the ACK at the first byte of the hole. The sender resends everything from there on. If I advertised a window size of 64 K and an MSS of 1000, then I don't have to ACK each packet. I may have time to sort out packets that are out of order as opposed to missing, if that's what you're getting at. >The fact that a number of packets ( number of bytes ) can be sent before >requiring acknowledgement makes the whole process a lot more efficient. That's right. That's the main thing to understand. >That's where I got confused. For whatever reason I had come to believe that >TCP acknowledged based on packets. I believe I understand this now. TCP >operates on packets ( segments is the more correct term ) and acknowledges >that it has received so many bytes out of the byte count indicated by the >window size. Don't confuse reliability with flow control. ACKs are used for reliability. Windows are used for flow control. You may have better luck with Stevens, "TCP/IP Illustrated." If you can, block out some time to study this with a Sniffer. That's how I learned it. Then you can start learning about Nagle, etc.! Priscilla >Amazing how it makes sense when you 1) read the material and 2) apply a bit >of thought. > >Thanks again > >Chuck > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of >Priscilla Oppenheimer >Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 12:37 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject:Re: TCP Sliding Windows question [7:6899] > >TCP sequences bytes. A lot of people assume that TCP sequences packets or >segments, but that's not true. > >The sequence number in a TCP header is the sequence number of the first >byte in the payload. It's not a segment number. The ACK is the number of >the next byte of payload expected. It's not a segment number. The sliding >window keeps track of how many bytes have been sent and acknowledged. > >The 3-way ha
Re: TR card what is it? [7:6902]
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, John Chang wrote: > I have this Token Ring card and I don't know what it is. Can you look at > it and let me know. Thanks. > > http://www-personal.umich.edu/~johnec/tr.html As indicated by the big fat DCA label silk-screened on the card, it was manufactured by DCA, aka Digital Communication Associates (which, IIRC, either folded down or were bought out years ago, possibly by either Microsoft or Attachmate). Judging by the edge bus connector and the bracket, it's an ISA (or perhaps EISA) card. Judging by the connector on the other side, it was probably designed to be mated to something else, or perhaps as a dual-bus card. (And now that I think of it, I dimly remember something about an ISA+MCA dual-bus card.) Does that answer your question? -- "Someone approached me and asked me to teach a javascript course. I was about to decline, saying that my complete ignorance of the subject made me unsuitable, then I thought again, that maybe it doesn't, as driving people away from it is a desirable outcome." --Me Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6917&t=6902 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Secure modems for out-of-band [7:6667]
Jon I use an Western Telematics APS 16 which is a rs232 serial port console switch... http://www.wti.com/ Just plug a modem onto one port, and the consoles of all your network or Sun/UNIX/Linux gear onto the rest, the phone up... You password each port too, admin and user levels.. Owen ""Jon"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > What kind of gear do folks use in their networks for out of band access to > production routers? Specifically, I'd like to know about more secure > solutions than just a CompUSA 33.6 plugged into the AUX port. > > I've seen security policies that allow a normal modem to be plugged into > the router, but it's required to be powered up (or connected to the phone > line) only when needed -- which still requires someone to touch the gear, > but may keep from having a network engineer drive all the way to the > remote site for a console connection. Better would be some secure modem > that uses an RSA token or local account database to allow login, and logs > all attempts to some IDS or syslogd somewhere. I've seen a few vendors' > websites, and all claim to be the final solution. Some even integrate a > terminal server, something like using a 2509 with a secure modem. > > I'd like to hear some field knowledge with these devices, and whether they > were worth the trouble, or if the powered-off modem is still the best > solution. And, this isn't a probe to see who doesn't use OOB security, > it's a real question -- hopefully it'll save me (maybe others) time > testing and evaluating some of this stuff. > > -jon- > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6918&t=6667 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: TCP Sliding Windows question [7:6899]
sort of continuing, although on an IPX track was reading Radia Perlman's book the other day, and she mentions that SPX has a window size of 1. Now, I seem to remember from my DOS/Win3.11 days that there was some kind of SPX burst facility available (with addition TSR drivers). Wasn't really au-fait with networking back int those days, but would I be right in assuming that this adds some kind of sliding window functionality to SPX? thanks Andy - Original Message - From: "Priscilla Oppenheimer" To: Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 11:44 PM Subject: RE: TCP Sliding Windows question [7:6899] > At 02:31 PM 6/2/01, Chuck Larrieu wrote: > >Thanks, PO. > > > >I should add that after I posted, I continued my reading, and a couple of > >pages later, Comer goes into a detailed explanation about how this works. > >Let me try to explain in my own words, and let's see if I "get it". > > > >Starting with me as a user. I want to download a Windows NT service pack - > >mucho megabytes. > > > >Before the file transfer actually begins, the TCP deamons on my PC and the > >Microsoft server agree on a window size. > > The two communicating stations do not agree on a window size. Each side has > its own window size. A low-end PC might start with a small window size. A > big UNIX ;-) server would likely start with a large window size. I took out > the window size parameter in my example below to simplify matters, but my > Windows 98 PC started with a window size of 8760 bytes. The server started > with 17520 bytes. The window size is advertised in each packet. It > specifies how many bytes the station is ready to receive at this time. It > can slide closed as a station gets overwhelmed. Hopefully it slides back > open as the station hands off bytes from its buffers to the application. > > >I'm going to use round numbers to > >male the math easier. We agree that the window size is 64K bytes - the > >server will send me 64K bytes before it expects an ack from me. Let's > >further say for argument's sake that the MTU throughout the network path is > >1000 bytes. I'm also going to skip calculations involving headers and stuff > >because I want to keep this simple. But I do understand that TCP and IP > >header sizes are accounted for by the sending TCP deamon. > > Each side specifies the size of the segment it can receive in the 3-way > handshake. The Max Segment Size (MSS) is a TCP option, one of the few ever > used. It does not count the TCP or IP header. In my example, both my PC and > the server said the their maximum segment size was 1460 bytes. So, in that > sense, they took into account the TCP and IP header sizes and understood > the MTU, as you say. > > > >OK, the window size is 64K bytes, and the packet size is going to be 1000 > >bytes. Therefore TCP can send 64 packets ( segments ) before expecting an > >ack. > > Segment size is 1000 bytes, OK. > > > >All right - file transfer begins. My machine receives the first packet. It > >sends an ack that tells the sender that of that 64K byte window, I have > >received bytes 1 through 1000. > > There's no need to send an ACK yet if the window size is 64 K. > > >Now, suppose some packets arrive out of > >sequence. Let's say I receive packet 20 before I receive packet 19 ( of the > >64 packets accounted for in the TCP window my ack tells the sender that I > >have received bytes20,001 through 21,000. If I never ack packet 19, ( or > >rather, the bytes contained within that stream ) then only packet 19 is > >retransmitted by the sender. > > Packets aren't numbered, so your wording is bugging me, and I don't think > the concept is quite right either. The ACK specifies the byte I expect to > receive next. It is a single number, not a range. If bytes are missing, I > have to keep the ACK at the first byte of the hole. The sender resends > everything from there on. > > If I advertised a window size of 64 K and an MSS of 1000, then I don't have > to ACK each packet. I may have time to sort out packets that are out of > order as opposed to missing, if that's what you're getting at. > > > >The fact that a number of packets ( number of bytes ) can be sent before > >requiring acknowledgement makes the whole process a lot more efficient. > > That's right. That's the main thing to understand. > > > >That's where I got confused. For whatever reason I had come to believe that > >TCP acknowledged based on packets. I believe I understand this now. TCP > >operates on packets ( segments is the more correct term ) and acknowledges > >that it has received so many bytes out of the byte count indicated by the > >window size. > > Don't confuse reliability with flow control. ACKs are used for reliability. > Windows are used for flow control. > > You may have better luck with Stevens, "TCP/IP Illustrated." If you can, > block out some time to study this with a Sniffer. That's how I learned it. > Then you can start learning about Nagle, etc.! > > Priscilla > > > >Amazing how it makes sense wh
Re: How to configure 1601 to load balance 2 Internet circuits [7:6920]
the previous email lost the bracketed info: ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 x.x.x.x(next hop ip address) ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 x.x.x.x(next hop ip address) thanks, Mike Nygard ""Mike Nygard"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hello Justin, > > The easiest way to resolve this would be to use multiple default routes from > global configuration: > > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 > > The router will load balance between the 2 routes. > > Thank you, > Mike Nygard > > > ""Justin Lofton"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I have a customer that has a 128k connection to the Internet and they are > > bringing in a T1 to the Internet but they want to load balance on both > > circuits for a week to be sure the new circuit is working properly. What > is > > the simpliest way to configure this scenario? Can I set multiple last > > resort gateways or what? Please help! > > > > Thanks everyone! > > > > Justin Lofton > > Account Executive/CCNA > > Tredent Data Systems > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > V: (818) 222-3770 > > F: (818) 222-3778 > > http://www.tredent.com/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6920&t=6920 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problem with home network [7:6922]
I have a cable modem connected to a linux box that is performing NAT from my invalid home network of 172.16.1.0/24 to my valid IP address 209.160.20.67. The 172.16.1.0 network is going into a small inexpensive hub. This setup has worked for about a year. A few days ago, I needed to do some things on the linux box. When I hooked everything back up my internet access was horrid. Found the following: If I ping from 172.16.1.98 (my PC) to the following addresses: 172.16.1.1 (PC's Default GW, E1 interface on Linux box) 0% Packet Loss 209.160.20.67 (E0 Linux IP address and address PC is being NATed to) 0% Packet loss 209.160.20.1 (GW of Linux Box) 70% Packet Loss If I ping from the Linux box I see no packet loss to 172.16.1.98 or 209.160.20.1. So I can now deduce the connection between the Linux box and the default GW is clean. But something is occuring with the NAT translations that causes 70% packet loss through the box. Ok, so here is the puzzling thing. If I remove the hub and use a crossover cable between the PC and Linux box the address which is problamatic 209.168.20.1 receives no packet loss when pinging from the PC - hence fixing the problem. So in other words, removing the hub on the 172.16.1.0 network fixes the connection at 209.168.20.1 ?!? Any ideas? Paul Borghese Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6922&t=6922 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
When the CCIE cert first came about there were not 100+ books avilable to help you pass it. There were not a multitude of online labs, lab study guides, study groups, ... Since all of those items are now available, I feel the bar has been lowered. I'm for putting it back where it was. Additionally I'm studying for my second CCIE cert, I sincerely hope that it is much tougher than my first. I want to maintain the value of the cert. Louie -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael L. Williams Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 12:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] I agree with you. It's awful easy for someone who's already gotten their CCIE (which when they passed the lab probably could be quoted as saying something like "that was the most difficult thing I've ever seen") to now say "Sure.. make it as difficult as possible " I don't know many CCIEs personally. Only a couple, and both of them said that given the time constraints of the lab (2 days), it is extremely difficult. So I don't think jamming it into 1 day just because Cisco is too cheap to spring for more testing centers to keep up with demand is a "resonable solution". Isn't this why Cisco is contemplating making it 1 day? Not to "raise the bar" of the level of the exam, but simply because they're testing centers can't handle the demand. Mashing into 1 day, IMHO, would be a very poor decision. Agreeing with Brad, do all of the CCIEs that are out there have a problem with leaving the bar where it was when you passed it? It only seems fair. Mike W. "Bradley J. Wilson" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > If I weren't up to the challenge, I wouldn't be on this newsgroup. Are you > up to the challenge of leaving the bar at the same height that it was when > *you* passed the test? I personally think the test is difficult enough as > it is. Am I a wimp because of that? Do we need to dump some dirt on the > top of Everest now that it's been conquered by someone else ahead of me? > > If Cisco wants to make the test "tougher," they're well within their rights > to do so. I just hope they don't call it the "CCIE" - call it something > different, and reset the numbers to zero (or 1025, whichever). > > > > > - Original Message - > From: Louie Belt > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:33 AM > Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > Any CCIE or CCIE candidate worth his salt would want the lab to be tougher. > A number of study aids are now available that were not in the past. This > has somewhat lessened the difficulty of the process (as witnessed by the > backlog of people taking the lab after breezing through the written). > Making it tougher is just a method of counterbalancing all of the increased > study aids and maintaining the value of the CCIE cert. > > If you truly want to obtain your CCIE then you should want it to be as > difficult as possible, otherwise where is the value in the cert? If you are > not up to the challenge, then don't make the attempt. > > As for who should evaluate the CCIE program - most (not all)employers > couldn't begin to answer the questions about what is needed from a CCIE. > The biggest employer of CCIE's is Cisco (by far) so they should already have > an idea of what is needed. Cisco has been respectful enough of the CCIE > population to also ask for their input and most have given it willingly. > > My main interested is in preserving the value of the CCIE cert. I am > currently studying for my 2nd CCIE cert and still hope they make it tougher > (before I complete it). I also hope they make the recertification tests > tougher as well. > > I'm up to the challenge - are you? > > > Louie > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Bradley J. Wilson > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 3:11 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > Forgive my cynicism, but any CCIE *would* want the lab to be tougher - they > would know that any CCIEs that came along after they received their number > increase the supply, thus lowering the cost of the good. ;-) > > I think Cisco ought to be asking companies who *hire* CCIEs what skills > *they* would like to see in those who carry the CCIE certification - not the > number-carrying CCIEs themselves. > > BJ > > P.S. And while I'm feeling cynical...can we please move the "NT vs. UNIX" > nonsense to private emails or perhaps a different mail list? Thenks. > > > - Original Message - > From: Belt, Louie > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 2:15 PM > Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > I filled out my survey and told them I wanted it to stay a two day lab - > and if anything - make it tougher. The explosion of materials available to > help people get tho
RE: Problem with home network [7:6922]
Since you touched the Linux box it would be the first suspect. Can you verify that there was no configuration change? - even by accident? If there was a change, can you roll it back to original? Are there other computers or printers connected to the hub? Is the hub single speed or dual speed? (10/100) (Thinking about speed/duplex mismatches.) How does the Linux box configure the default route? Does it point to its own E0 interface or to the remote GW? (Thinking about filling its ARP cache) > -Original Message- > From: Paul Borghese [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 7:42 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Problem with home network [7:6922] > > > I have a cable modem connected to a linux box that is > performing NAT from my > invalid home network of 172.16.1.0/24 to my valid IP address > 209.160.20.67. > The 172.16.1.0 network is going into a small inexpensive hub. > This setup > has worked for about a year. > > A few days ago, I needed to do some things on the linux box. > When I hooked > everything back up my internet access was horrid. Found the > following: > > If I ping from 172.16.1.98 (my PC) to the following addresses: > > 172.16.1.1 (PC's Default GW, E1 interface on Linux box) > 0% Packet Loss > 209.160.20.67 (E0 Linux IP address and address PC is being > NATed to) 0% > Packet loss > 209.160.20.1 (GW of Linux Box) > 70% Packet Loss > > If I ping from the Linux box I see no packet loss to 172.16.1.98 or > 209.160.20.1. So I can now deduce the connection between the > Linux box and > the default GW is clean. > > But something is occuring with the NAT translations that > causes 70% packet > loss through the box. > > > Ok, so here is the puzzling thing. If I remove the hub and > use a crossover > cable between the PC and Linux box the address which is problamatic > 209.168.20.1 receives no packet loss when pinging from the PC > - hence fixing > the problem. > > So in other words, removing the hub on the 172.16.1.0 network > fixes the > connection at 209.168.20.1 ?!? > > Any ideas? > > > Paul Borghese > Report misconduct > and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6924&t=6922 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IPX/SPX window? (was TCP Sliding Windows question) [7:6925]
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, andyh wrote: > sort of continuing, although on an IPX track > > was reading Radia Perlman's book the other day, and she mentions that SPX > has a window size of 1. Now, I seem to remember from my DOS/Win3.11 days > that there was some kind of SPX burst facility available (with addition TSR > drivers). Wasn't really au-fait with networking back int those days, but > would I be right in assuming that this adds some kind of sliding window > functionality to SPX? The burst facility you're thinking of is probably the one used by NCP, which is Novell's notion of a client-to-server application-level protocol, and is to SPX what the original NFS was to TCP (ie, a distant relative). SPX-with-a-real-window was (IIRC) what SPX2 would have been had it not been stillborn. All of the above is from dim memories, and any relation to reality may or may not be a coincidence. -- "Someone approached me and asked me to teach a javascript course. I was about to decline, saying that my complete ignorance of the subject made me unsuitable, then I thought again, that maybe it doesn't, as driving people away from it is a desirable outcome." --Me Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6925&t=6925 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Problem with home network [7:6922]
Yea, I have a theory. It has to do with the Linux box, defaulting to 100MB. Let's suppose the Linux box and PC are both running at 100 MB/sec but the hub is only 10 MB/sec. Maybe the timing is such that it will not work past one hop. When I recompiled the kernel, maybe the new kernel release changed how the modules works on the Ethernet card, causing it to not detect 10 MB/sec connections and to default to 100 MB/sec. I will do a diff on the code. Who knows? Paul Daniel Cotts wrote: > > Since you touched the Linux box it would be the first suspect. > Can you verify that there was no configuration change? - even > by accident? > If there was a change, can you roll it back to original? > Are there other computers or printers connected to the hub? > Is the hub single speed or dual speed? (10/100) > (Thinking about speed/duplex mismatches.) > How does the Linux box configure the default route? Does it > point to its own > E0 interface or to the remote GW? (Thinking about filling its > ARP cache) > > > -Original Message- > > From: Paul Borghese [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 7:42 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Problem with home network [7:6922] > > > > > > I have a cable modem connected to a linux box that is > > performing NAT from my > > invalid home network of 172.16.1.0/24 to my valid IP address > > 209.160.20.67. > > The 172.16.1.0 network is going into a small inexpensive hub. > > This setup > > has worked for about a year. > > > > A few days ago, I needed to do some things on the linux box. > > When I hooked > > everything back up my internet access was horrid. Found the > > following: > > > > If I ping from 172.16.1.98 (my PC) to the following addresses: > > > > 172.16.1.1 (PC's Default GW, E1 interface on Linux box) > > 0% Packet Loss > > 209.160.20.67 (E0 Linux IP address and address PC is being > > NATed to) 0% > > Packet loss > > 209.160.20.1 (GW of Linux Box) > > 70% Packet Loss > > > > If I ping from the Linux box I see no packet loss to > 172.16.1.98 or > > 209.160.20.1. So I can now deduce the connection between the > > Linux box and > > the default GW is clean. > > > > But something is occuring with the NAT translations that > > causes 70% packet > > loss through the box. > > > > > > Ok, so here is the puzzling thing. If I remove the hub and > > use a crossover > > cable between the PC and Linux box the address which is > problamatic > > 209.168.20.1 receives no packet loss when pinging from the PC > > - hence fixing > > the problem. > > > > So in other words, removing the hub on the 172.16.1.0 network > > fixes the > > connection at 209.168.20.1 ?!? > > > > Any ideas? > > > > > > Paul Borghese > > Report misconduct > > and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6926&t=6922 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
Well, again, Sir Edmund, just because the newcomers can be better-informed before their attempts doesn't mean that the challenge needs to be altered or is less of a challenge for the individual. Again, I'm not against making certs tougher to achieve. But it sounds like there's a touch of bitterness that these study guides weren't around way back when...well, that's just the way life is. Making the CCIE "tougher" and still calling it the "CCIE" is like asking runners to run a 400m race, but then making them run 500m without telling them. ;-) Besides, the argument about the study materials is subjective. Was CCO around when you took the CCIE? Were other engineers around who were studying for it? Were used routers around for you to purchase, and perhaps set up for others to telnet into? I'm sure there were - if you (and/or others) didn't make use of them, then that's water under the source-route bridge. If you want someone to be angry at, be angry at the people who took the CCIE, passed or not, and then went out and wrote books on how to study for the CCIE. But I personally don't think these people are doing a disservice to the CCIE, nor are they devaluing it - and with a consistent 80% failure rate, they're certainly not making it "less challenging." The study guides, etc. make it more of a group effort, and there's nothing wrong with that - not against the rules, not against the NDA, and our society wins because we're able to learn from (and teach to) one another, thereby filling the desperate need we have today for knowledgeable network engineers. Don't punish those of us who have not yet earned our CCIE status for using the resources which are available to us - or for having the foresight to create and share new resources. It really sounds like your argument is that it should be more of a "dog-eat-dog" world than a world where we're allowed to cooperate and share knowledge. Am I wrong? If so, why? - Original Message - From: Louie Belt To: Bradley J. Wilson Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 8:56 PM Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] I willing to have the tougher recerts and the tougher challenge with my 2nd CCIE cert. The bar has been lowered due to the deluge of study materials that are now present to assist you. I'm for putting the bar back to where it was taking into consideration the additional study aids available. Louie and also wrote... When the CCIE cert first came about there were not 100+ books avilable to help you pass it. There were not a multitude of online labs, lab study guides, study groups, ... Since all of those items are now available, I feel the bar has been lowered. I'm for putting it back where it was. Additionally I'm studying for my second CCIE cert, I sincerely hope that it is much tougher than my first. I want to maintain the value of the cert. Louie -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bradley J. Wilson Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 10:32 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] If I weren't up to the challenge, I wouldn't be on this newsgroup. Are you up to the challenge of leaving the bar at the same height that it was when *you* passed the test? I personally think the test is difficult enough as it is. Am I a wimp because of that? Do we need to dump some dirt on the top of Everest now that it's been conquered by someone else ahead of me? If Cisco wants to make the test "tougher," they're well within their rights to do so. I just hope they don't call it the "CCIE" - call it something different, and reset the numbers to zero (or 1025, whichever). - Original Message - From: Louie Belt To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:33 AM Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] Any CCIE or CCIE candidate worth his salt would want the lab to be tougher. A number of study aids are now available that were not in the past. This has somewhat lessened the difficulty of the process (as witnessed by the backlog of people taking the lab after breezing through the written). Making it tougher is just a method of counterbalancing all of the increased study aids and maintaining the value of the CCIE cert. If you truly want to obtain your CCIE then you should want it to be as difficult as possible, otherwise where is the value in the cert? If you are not up to the challenge, then don't make the attempt. As for who should evaluate the CCIE program - most (not all)employers couldn't begin to answer the questions about what is needed from a CCIE. The biggest employer of CCIE's is Cisco (by far) so they should already have an idea of what is needed. Cisco has been respectful enough of the CCIE population to also ask for their input and most have given it willingly. My main interested is in preserving the value of the CCIE cert. I am currently studying for my 2nd CCIE cert and still hope they make it tougher (
Re: traffic can't cross pix [7:6895]
HI Call TAC or search CCO. There is an ICMP bug in the 5.2 and 5.3 code. This _might_ be the problem. HTH -- John Hardman CCNP MCSE ""pat"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >I have this problem. I can't ping anything outside > the pix from machines inside. Pix inside IP is the > default gateway for all the machines & they can ping > the gateway. I can also ping outside world from pix. > What is causing this problem...? I have pasted pix > configs below. this is new pix & it never worked > before. I have seen identical pix configs working > earlier. > > thanks_ > > > > > PIX Version 5.2(3) > nameif ethernet0 outside security0 > nameif ethernet1 inside security100 > hostname pix-con > fixup protocol ftp 21 > fixup protocol http 80 > fixup protocol h323 1720 > fixup protocol rsh 514 > fixup protocol smtp 25 > fixup protocol sqlnet 1521 > fixup protocol sip 5060 > names > access-list 101 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 > 192.168.100.0 255.255.255.0 > access-list 102 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 > 192.168.100.0 255.255.255.0 > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.231 > eq www > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.227 > eq smtp > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.228 > eq pop3 > access-list check permit icmp any any > pager lines 24 > logging on > no logging timestamp > no logging standby > no logging console > no logging monitor > logging buffered warnings > no logging trap > no logging history > logging facility 20 > logging queue 512 > interface ethernet0 auto > interface ethernet1 auto > mtu outside 1500 > mtu inside 1500 > ip address outside 212.19.133.226 255.255.255.240 > ip address inside 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 > ip audit info action alarm > ip audit attack action alarm > arp timeout 14400 > global (outside) 1 interface > nat (inside) 0 access-list 101 > nat (inside) 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 > static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.227 192.168.0.2 > netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 > static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.228 192.168.0.3 > netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 > static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.231 192.168.0.4 > netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 > access-group check in interface outside > route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 212.19.133.225 1 > timeout xlate 3:00:00 > timeout conn 1:00:00 half-closed 0:10:00 udp 0:02:00 > rpc 0:10:00 h323 0:05:00 si > p 0:30:00 sip_media 0:02:00 > timeout uauth 0:05:00 absolute > aaa-server TACACS+ protocol tacacs+ > aaa-server RADIUS protocol radius > no snmp-server location > no snmp-server contact > snmp-server community public > no snmp-server enable traps > floodguard enable > sysopt connection permit-ipsec > no sysopt route dnat > crypto ipsec transform-set standard esp-des > esp-md5-hmac > crypto map peer_map 10 ipsec-isakmp > crypto map peer_map 10 match address 102 > crypto map peer_map 10 set peer 212.46.19.194 > crypto map peer_map 10 set transform-set standard > isakmp enable outside > isakmp key l9k834 address 212.46.19.194 netmask > 255.255.255.255 > isakmp identity address > isakmp policy 10 authentication pre-share > isakmp policy 10 encryption des > isakmp policy 10 hash md5 > isakmp policy 10 group 1 > isakmp policy 10 lifetime 3600 > telnet 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 inside > telnet timeout 15 > terminal width 80 > > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > PIX Version 5.2(3) > nameif ethernet0 outside security0 > nameif ethernet1 inside security100 > hostname pix-con > fixup protocol ftp 21 > fixup protocol http 80 > fixup protocol h323 1720 > fixup protocol rsh 514 > fixup protocol smtp 25 > fixup protocol sqlnet 1521 > fixup protocol sip 5060 > names > access-list 101 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.100.0 > 255.255.255.0 > access-list 102 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.100.0 > 255.255.255.0 > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.231 eq www > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.227 eq smtp > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.228 eq pop3 > access-list check permit icmp any any > pager lines 24 > logging on > no logging timestamp > no logging standby > no logging console > no logging monitor > logging buffered warnings > no logging trap > no logging history > logging facility 20 > logging queue 512 > interface ethernet0 auto > interface ethernet1 auto > mtu outside 1500 > mtu inside 1500 > ip address outside 212.19.133.226 255.255.255.240 > ip address inside 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 > ip audit info action alarm > ip audit attack action alarm > arp timeout 14400 > global (outside) 1 interface > nat (inside) 0 access-list 101 > nat (inside) 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 > static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.227 192.168.0.2 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 > 0 > static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.228 192.168.0.3 netmask 255.255.255.255 0 > 0 > static (inside,outside) 212.19.133
Re: traffic can't cross pix [7:6895]
Hello Pat, I concur with Gaz.the config looks fine. We are running the same version of finesse on some our PIX 515's with similar configs, and can pass icmp traffic. By adding the line permit icmp any anyit punches a hole in the ACA and allows the echo reply back in. I would try, as suggested by Gaz, clear xlate. Also, to make sure translation isn't failing and to watch the icmp traffic: debug icmp trace. Thanks, Mike Nygard ""pat"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >I have this problem. I can't ping anything outside > the pix from machines inside. Pix inside IP is the > default gateway for all the machines & they can ping > the gateway. I can also ping outside world from pix. > What is causing this problem...? I have pasted pix > configs below. this is new pix & it never worked > before. I have seen identical pix configs working > earlier. > > thanks_ > > > > > PIX Version 5.2(3) > nameif ethernet0 outside security0 > nameif ethernet1 inside security100 > hostname pix-con > fixup protocol ftp 21 > fixup protocol http 80 > fixup protocol h323 1720 > fixup protocol rsh 514 > fixup protocol smtp 25 > fixup protocol sqlnet 1521 > fixup protocol sip 5060 > names > access-list 101 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 > 192.168.100.0 255.255.255.0 > access-list 102 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 > 192.168.100.0 255.255.255.0 > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.231 > eq www > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.227 > eq smtp > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.228 > eq pop3 > access-list check permit icmp any any > pager lines 24 > logging on > no logging timestamp > no logging standby > no logging console > no logging monitor > logging buffered warnings > no logging trap > no logging history > logging facility 20 > logging queue 512 > interface ethernet0 auto > interface ethernet1 auto > mtu outside 1500 > mtu inside 1500 > ip address outside 212.19.133.226 255.255.255.240 > ip address inside 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 > ip audit info action alarm > ip audit attack action alarm > arp timeout 14400 > global (outside) 1 interface > nat (inside) 0 access-list 101 > nat (inside) 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 0 0 > static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.227 192.168.0.2 > netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 > static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.228 192.168.0.3 > netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 > static (inside,outside) 212.19.133.231 192.168.0.4 > netmask 255.255.255.255 0 0 > access-group check in interface outside > route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 212.19.133.225 1 > timeout xlate 3:00:00 > timeout conn 1:00:00 half-closed 0:10:00 udp 0:02:00 > rpc 0:10:00 h323 0:05:00 si > p 0:30:00 sip_media 0:02:00 > timeout uauth 0:05:00 absolute > aaa-server TACACS+ protocol tacacs+ > aaa-server RADIUS protocol radius > no snmp-server location > no snmp-server contact > snmp-server community public > no snmp-server enable traps > floodguard enable > sysopt connection permit-ipsec > no sysopt route dnat > crypto ipsec transform-set standard esp-des > esp-md5-hmac > crypto map peer_map 10 ipsec-isakmp > crypto map peer_map 10 match address 102 > crypto map peer_map 10 set peer 212.46.19.194 > crypto map peer_map 10 set transform-set standard > isakmp enable outside > isakmp key l9k834 address 212.46.19.194 netmask > 255.255.255.255 > isakmp identity address > isakmp policy 10 authentication pre-share > isakmp policy 10 encryption des > isakmp policy 10 hash md5 > isakmp policy 10 group 1 > isakmp policy 10 lifetime 3600 > telnet 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 inside > telnet timeout 15 > terminal width 80 > > > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > PIX Version 5.2(3) > nameif ethernet0 outside security0 > nameif ethernet1 inside security100 > hostname pix-con > fixup protocol ftp 21 > fixup protocol http 80 > fixup protocol h323 1720 > fixup protocol rsh 514 > fixup protocol smtp 25 > fixup protocol sqlnet 1521 > fixup protocol sip 5060 > names > access-list 101 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.100.0 > 255.255.255.0 > access-list 102 permit ip 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.100.0 > 255.255.255.0 > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.231 eq www > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.227 eq smtp > access-list check permit tcp any host 212.19.133.228 eq pop3 > access-list check permit icmp any any > pager lines 24 > logging on > no logging timestamp > no logging standby > no logging console > no logging monitor > logging buffered warnings > no logging trap > no logging history > logging facility 20 > logging queue 512 > interface ethernet0 auto > interface ethernet1 auto > mtu outside 1500 > mtu inside 1500 > ip address outside 212.19.133.226 255.255.255.240 > ip address inside 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0 > ip audit info action alarm > ip audit attack action alarm > arp timeout 14400 > global (
RE: IPX/SPX window? (was TCP Sliding Windows question) [7:6925]
If memory serves ( always a question in my case ) the facility was called Pburst, ( maybe pburst.nlm? ) and was one of those things that got blamed for a lot of problems on Novell servers. Almost the first words out of any NetWare engineer's mouth were "have you disabled packet burst?" -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of ElephantChild Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 6:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: IPX/SPX window? (was TCP Sliding Windows question) [7:6925] On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, andyh wrote: > sort of continuing, although on an IPX track > > was reading Radia Perlman's book the other day, and she mentions that SPX > has a window size of 1. Now, I seem to remember from my DOS/Win3.11 days > that there was some kind of SPX burst facility available (with addition TSR > drivers). Wasn't really au-fait with networking back int those days, but > would I be right in assuming that this adds some kind of sliding window > functionality to SPX? The burst facility you're thinking of is probably the one used by NCP, which is Novell's notion of a client-to-server application-level protocol, and is to SPX what the original NFS was to TCP (ie, a distant relative). SPX-with-a-real-window was (IIRC) what SPX2 would have been had it not been stillborn. All of the above is from dim memories, and any relation to reality may or may not be a coincidence. -- "Someone approached me and asked me to teach a javascript course. I was about to decline, saying that my complete ignorance of the subject made me unsuitable, then I thought again, that maybe it doesn't, as driving people away from it is a desirable outcome." --Me Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6928&t=6925 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Error in configuring the Catalyst 1924 switch [7:1072]
"Suspended-LinkBeat" means that the port was suspended due to the absence of a linkbeat. This is usually a physical-layer problem, such as the host is not connected, or the cable is bad. -- Ron Bandes, CCNA, MCSE, BA CS, Certified Technical Trainer Cloud Nine Networks, LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] remove Spam_me_not. to email me ""Navin Parwal"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hi , > I have just replaced my network with a Cisco catalyst 1924 switch from a > hub , as soon as i start my switch , I am not able to ping to any of the > systems , when I go the browser menu and check the port status , it shows me > suspended-linkbeat on all of the ports , the ports are enabled and there are > lights blinking on all of the ports where I have my hosts connected . >How to enable all of the ports again . > Please guide me , I am new in networking . > thanks, > -- > Navin K Parwal Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6929&t=1072 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: last word: UNIX guys look down on we NT guys [7:6842]
I work with both os's, so here is my two cents. Everyone should calm down. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being an nt admin. Or for that matter being an Unix admin either. However, for what it's worth, Unix was first and therefore it is alot easier to move from Unix to other operating systems in a job field. If you can understand the Unix language, dos is a breeze. It's an offshoot. However in my experience, just because someone is an NT admin, doesn't necessarily mean they can operate from dos mode. Nt and dos are two entirely different operating systems. However, what what I have seen in my Unix environment, which by the way does not use a gui environment, is much much more challenging. Which I like. === Your quote: I made $240K last year 'cause I >had 10 people working for me and I'll make even more >this year. > >Sorry, I'm not trying to show off here, I'm just >trying to teach some smart UNIX guys a lesson: show >some respect to others. === I certainly don't make the money you make, but, I love my job. It is challenging and a great learning experience. I want respect for the knowledge I have acquired, and not for the amt of $ I make. I like knowing who my real friends are. Respect based strickly from money is nothing. Surely you didn't mean this the way it sounded. Jennifer Cribbs >= Original Message From "Jim Bond" = >Come one man, this is not a sour grape, right? > >I'm not comparing which OS is good, which is bad. >Every OS has pros and cons, what I'm saying is some >guys' attitude. > >What's wrong with being a NT admin? What's wrong with >a NT guy making $240K? I made $240K last year 'cause I >had 10 people working for me and I'll make even more >this year. > >Sorry, I'm not trying to show off here, I'm just >trying to teach some smart UNIX guys a lesson: show >some respect to others. > >By the way, I'm not that smart but I've got MS >Computer Science degree and I speak 2 languages >(English is my second language), so before you call me >looser, tell me what you have. > >Jim > > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Christopher Kolp >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 10:46 PM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: RE: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down >> on we NT guys? >> [7:6353] >> >> >> Hey NT LOOSER, >> >> Go away. This a cisco mailing list. >> >> Why don't you go study for the MCSE or something... >> >> =] >> >> >> >> > -Original Message- >> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >> > Jim Bond >> > Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 8:41 PM >> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > Subject: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down >> on we NT >> > guys? [7:6323] >> > >> > >> > UNIX guys, >> > >> > I make $240K per year, how much you make? Why you >> guys >> > look down on us??? I don't get it... >> > >> > >> > Jim >> > NT guy >> > >> > __ >> > Do You Yahoo!? >> > Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great >> prices >> > http://auctions.yahoo.com/ >> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: >> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html >> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html >> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >__ >Do You Yahoo!? >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 >a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ Have a great day! Jenn Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6930&t=6842 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
Louie, I understand your point about "not a multitude of study materials, etc". I can't imagine studying for any Cisco exam without having good books and Cisco's website at my disposal. However, I don't see how having more study material makes the the actual material less complex or performing the hands-on of the lab less difficult. So I don't agree that having those materials available "lowered the bar". To make an analogy to high-jumping, I don't believe having the materials lowered the bar, I think it's more akin to having a better coach to tell you how to jump properly to make it over the same bar. And, in my mind, there's nothing wrong with that, since having a better high-jumping coach doesn't "cheapen" the sport of high-jumping. Previously you said, "A number of study aids are now available that were not in the past. This has somewhat lessened the difficulty of the process (as witnessed by the backlog of people taking the lab after breezing through the written)." I don't believe this is a good conclusion. You statement makes the assumption that the number of people entering the Cisco field, or at least attempting the CCIE, has been constant. If anything, this is opposite of the truth. I would account for the backlog for the CCIE lab with 2 things: 1) Acknowledging that more and more people are coming into this field and attempting the CCIE. 2) Cisco has done nothing to increase their lab availability to accomodate the new demand. If anything, they're directly responsible for the backlog because now there are only TWO places in all of North America to take the lab. Didn't there used to be 3 places (CA, NC, and Canada)? I'm glad to hear you're going for your second CCIE cert. I sincerely wish you the best of luck! I admire the fact that you look for, and aren't afraid of a true challenge. Mike W. "Louie Belt" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > When the CCIE cert first came about there were not 100+ books avilable to > help you pass it. There were not a multitude of online labs, lab study > guides, study groups, ... Since all of those items are now available, I > feel the bar has been lowered. I'm for putting it back where it was. > > Additionally I'm studying for my second CCIE cert, I sincerely hope that it > is much tougher than my first. I want to maintain the value of the cert. > > Louie > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Michael L. Williams > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 12:09 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > I agree with you. It's awful easy for someone who's already gotten their > CCIE (which when they passed the lab probably could be quoted as saying > something like "that was the most difficult thing I've ever seen") to now > say "Sure.. make it as difficult as possible " > > I don't know many CCIEs personally. Only a couple, and both of them said > that given the time constraints of the lab (2 days), it is extremely > difficult. So I don't think jamming it into 1 day just because Cisco is too > cheap to spring for more testing centers to keep up with demand is a > "resonable solution". Isn't this why Cisco is contemplating making it 1 > day? Not to "raise the bar" of the level of the exam, but simply because > they're testing centers can't handle the demand. Mashing into 1 day, IMHO, > would be a very poor decision. > > Agreeing with Brad, do all of the CCIEs that are out there have a problem > with leaving the bar where it was when you passed it? It only seems fair. > > Mike W. > > "Bradley J. Wilson" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > If I weren't up to the challenge, I wouldn't be on this newsgroup. Are > you > > up to the challenge of leaving the bar at the same height that it was when > > *you* passed the test? I personally think the test is difficult enough as > > it is. Am I a wimp because of that? Do we need to dump some dirt on the > > top of Everest now that it's been conquered by someone else ahead of me? > > > > If Cisco wants to make the test "tougher," they're well within their > rights > > to do so. I just hope they don't call it the "CCIE" - call it something > > different, and reset the numbers to zero (or 1025, whichever). > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: Louie Belt > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:33 AM > > Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > > > > Any CCIE or CCIE candidate worth his salt would want the lab to be > tougher. > > A number of study aids are now available that were not in the past. This > > has somewhat lessened the difficulty of the process (as witnessed by the > > backlog of people taking the lab after breezing through the written). > > Making it tougher is just a method of counterbalancing all of the > increased > > study aids and maintaining the value of
Re: TR card what is it? [7:6902]
Heh.. I've got one of those too.. it let's you change which side you connect to so that you could use either Microchannel or ISA hehe "John Chang" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I have this Token Ring card and I don't know what it is. Can you look at > it and let me know. Thanks. > > http://www-personal.umich.edu/~johnec/tr.html Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6932&t=6902 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
Yes you are wrong (about my perspective). I have helped several engineers study for and pass the CCIE written as well as the lab. My concern is in preserving the value of the cert. As for dog-eat-dog I'll help anyone who is sincere and wants to learn - providing they are willing to put in the effort. However, I will not "give them the answers" so that they can make the value of my cert less. Prior to so much study material being available, you had to study and know how to handle a wide array of issues, the specifics as to what is on the lab were simply unknown and therefore you had to be prepared for anything - and know it well. Now that the study materials have become available, it allows a candidate to be more focused on lab specific issues instead of on routing and swicthing in general. As a result a candidate can now pass the lab without having a decent broad knowledge of routing and switching, they just need to know how to prepare for the lab. That in my opinion has devalued the certification. If we have 100,000 CCIEs all of which know there stuff and are a credit to the certification then I have no problem with it. It we have 8000 CCIEs and 1000 of them can't live up to the expectations of the certification, then it hurts the value not only of the other 7000, but also of any future recipients of the certification. I am not bitter or angry (thanks for jumping to conclusions) that the study guides weren't around, some were when I received my cert and I certainly used them. I don't want them to go away. I own many of the books written by other CCIEs and use them as a reference quite often. I am thankful they are available. The materials that exist have the potential to help all of us. My issue is simply one of "The CCIE certification should not be devaulued" - that is my chief concern and my reason for answering the survey the way I did. The only reason I posted my response to the survey was because I was asked to do so. I apologize if my opinions differ from yours and you are therefore offended. It was not my intention to offend you. You most certainly are entitled to your opinion and I don't expect to change your mind. Hope this clears things up a bit, otherwise we'll have to just agree to disagree. Louie -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bradley J. Wilson Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:13 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] Well, again, Sir Edmund, just because the newcomers can be better-informed before their attempts doesn't mean that the challenge needs to be altered or is less of a challenge for the individual. Again, I'm not against making certs tougher to achieve. But it sounds like there's a touch of bitterness that these study guides weren't around way back when...well, that's just the way life is. Making the CCIE "tougher" and still calling it the "CCIE" is like asking runners to run a 400m race, but then making them run 500m without telling them. ;-) Besides, the argument about the study materials is subjective. Was CCO around when you took the CCIE? Were other engineers around who were studying for it? Were used routers around for you to purchase, and perhaps set up for others to telnet into? I'm sure there were - if you (and/or others) didn't make use of them, then that's water under the source-route bridge. If you want someone to be angry at, be angry at the people who took the CCIE, passed or not, and then went out and wrote books on how to study for the CCIE. But I personally don't think these people are doing a disservice to the CCIE, nor are they devaluing it - and with a consistent 80% failure rate, they're certainly not making it "less challenging." The study guides, etc. make it more of a group effort, and there's nothing wrong with that - not against the rules, not against the NDA, and our society wins because we're able to learn from (and teach to) one another, thereby filling the desperate need we have today for knowledgeable network engineers. Don't punish those of us who have not yet earned our CCIE status for using the resources which are available to us - or for having the foresight to create and share new resources. It really sounds like your argument is that it should be more of a "dog-eat-dog" world than a world where we're allowed to cooperate and share knowledge. Am I wrong? If so, why? - Original Message - From: Louie Belt To: Bradley J. Wilson Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 8:56 PM Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] I willing to have the tougher recerts and the tougher challenge with my 2nd CCIE cert. The bar has been lowered due to the deluge of study materials that are now present to assist you. I'm for putting the bar back to where it was taking into consideration the additional study aids available. Louie and also wrote... When the CCIE cert first came about there were not 100+ books avilable to
Re: 520 PIX Firewall upgrade [7:6934]
Hi Jonatas, This may have already been answered, but I would like to share my experience with this upgrade of PIX 520 .First of all you have to determine your memory size ( flash, RAM) , you might not see thesize of flash when you do # sh ver but you will see 128MB of RAM and as far I know all PIX box with this RAM has 16MB of flash .Also write down your Serial Number it will help you getting the activation key for VPN-DES or VPN-3DES when you send your request to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and provide show version output to them.If you do # wr t at the end of your config . in ver 4.2(4) you might see your key sometime (it depends). Go to www.cisco.com and download the procedure for upgrading PIX 520 and read the procedure carefully and proced to download the ver. you want (I recommend a lowerver. 5. 12 f.i. first and then another one higher f.i. 5.25), so you will have to download the followings file : bh512.bin, bh525.bin, pix512.bin, pix525. bin , rawrite, readme..The procedure has a small typos when you prepare your floppy disk , after formating youhave to C:\>rawrite and put the file name : bh512.bin instead pix512.bin and follow the procedure. At the end it will ask you for if you want to change the activation key so if you got it from Cisco TAC you can put it know ...and you are done.Caution: If you have another PIX 520 which is your failover PIX when you plug your failover cable you might run in some problems all you have to do is too wait long enough till you PIX's syncronize , to see you can type # show failover and look to see which box is Active and which is in standby. Good luck, Mike Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6934&t=6934 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: VERY strange 2621 behavior [7:6636]
Rule 1:Don't use hyperterminal See cws.internet.com or any other shareware/freeware site for apps that can do a break properly and do not suck. Brian "Sonic" Whalen Success = Preparation + Opportunity On Thu, 31 May 2001, Daniel Cotts wrote: > Time to change your terminal emulation software to different speeds until > you find the correct one. > I have heard that with Hyperterminal that you need to completely close down > the application for each speed change. Others may comment from experience. > BTW Do you have a SmartNet service contract on that box? > > > -Original Message- > > From: John Neiberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 12:41 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: VERY strange 2621 behavior [7:6636] > > > > > > This is exceptionally strange > > > > We just received a used 2621 running 12.0(7)T. Initially it booted > > just fine and we got a prompt. While in priveleged mode we did a show > > run and intertwined with the output was a portion of a message. The > > readable portion said something about "environment write to NVRAM > > failed". We saw this three or four times. > > > > So, after poking around a bit we did a reload. During the reload we > > saw the error again. Toward the end of the reload we > > received a warning > > message that said something like this: "This action will disable > > password recovery. Be sure that you have alternatives to password > > recovery before continuing. Continue with operation [yes/no]? " > > > > I have absolutely no idea what that means, I have never seen anything > > like it before. We answered no, of course. At this point the router > > locked up and it appears that the console baud rate has changed but so > > far we're unable to figure out what it changed to. I've rebooted the > > router several times to no avail. Nothing but gibberish on > > my terminal > > screen. > > > > Any thoughts? I've searched CCO and have yet to see anything about > > this behavior yet. > > > > Thanks, > > John > > Report misconduct > > and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6935&t=6636 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? [7:6936]
My final reply on this. ""Kelly Hair"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Jason - > >Regarding your barb on > Unix experts should be CCIEs - by the same token we should could also state > that all NT admins are on the same level as all script kiddies... Please... > there are some good/great NT admins out there who are very technical. I'm very glad you finally agree. See, it's not that difficult.. in case you have not notice, this whole thread started with some silly "unix guru" putting down NT people. :-) > > You never answered the Windows 3.1 AS question... Would you trust your > Enterprise to this? To answer your Q, I have run enterprise on this. I have moved on, (which is something you should think about) > There are Unix systems that are still running from > that um.. time period. For some fun reading, Jason, check out > http://www.sciam.com/1998/1198issue/1198techbus2.html Perhaps the link is > a little old but it is one example of how many organizations are attempting > to use Windows NT in the Enterprise. Hopefully, the IRS does not... Then > again, 4 billion later and they still have problems perhaps that could be > their new answer. If only that flat tax would pass... sigh... I still have DOS running ocassionally, as have been mentioned before, all OS has it's place. So stick that in your thick skull > > If Cisco is working on a GUI then they are going the same path as Lucent and > others before them. I cannot wait until the know it all manager configures > the network and does not understand why it doesn't work... I mean.. all the > pretty lines with a thunderbolt connected to a ring here and a bar there... > Guess there will always be work for IT folks :) So the reason why Cisco should be working on a GUI is so that there will be work for pple like you ? > > One last thing.. could you send me some mail offline from this mailing list? > You are listed as an anonymous poster and I would love to continue this > conversation in a more private forum. In fact, let's don't even continue this conversation, public or private. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6936&t=6936 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NAT on PIX515 [7:6938]
Can anyone tell me more about the 'Show Connections' and the 'show xlate' commands on the PIX? Does the 'sh conn' show the current connections and if so, does it show the outbound connections and the inbound connections or just the outbound connections? The same for the 'sh xlate' command. Thanks, Chris __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6938&t=6938 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? [7:6937]
Guess I have not read any CCNA books recently I won't even bother to flame you for the "joke??" . When you find me a unix admin who can plan the deployment of 50,000 workstation and successfully roll it out, we can discuss again ""Michael L. Williams"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > In case you haven't noticed, most CCNA books point out the fact that the IOS > uses a "Unix-ish" shell, with command line completion, etc. just like Unix. > > Some of the low end equipment, like the 700 series and the 1900s allow you > to use a web interface, but virtually everything else is command line. > > Can you provide facts showing that the IOS *isn't* Unix-ish? Perhaps Cisco > is working on a GUI, (don't flame me for this ... it's a joke), they're > working on a GUI so all the NT admins can have a chance at becoming Cisco > gurus =) > > Mike W. (former NT admin) > > "Jason" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > Oh, now the IOS is Unixish ?? Phew, so by that token, all Unix experts > would > > be CCIE... so I guess the number would include all the so call Unix/Linux > > "experts" > > I don't remember mentioning that the ATM runs NT, most of them actually > run > > OS2. The extra $$ you save from using open?? source OS would be waste on > > support > > > > In case you have not notice, Cisco is working on a GUI > > > > > > > > ""Kelly Hair"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > "Jason" - > > > > > > By your logic, Windows NT 3.1 is all you need for your Enterprise to > > > succeed. Good luck in that endevour! > > > > > > In response to your other point, yes, I would trust my ATM server to > > Linux. > > > The blue screen is pretty but I would prefer to have money instead. > Oh.. > > > not to mention the extra money I would have from using a an open source > OS > > > rather than an M$ one... > > > > > > Perhaps Cisco should throw out the Unixish IOS and replace it with a GUI > > so > > > everyone could write configs for routers. Sounds like a grand idea... > > > > > > Regards, > > > Kelly > > > > > > > What was your point ? That Multics sucks , and by the same token, > > > > therefore Unix sucks and NT/W2K rules !!! At least, NT/W2K was based > on > > > > a working operating system. Anyone of you notice that Unix is all > about > > > > ego ? If Unix is finished in 1 month, why are there still people > > > > working on it ? On the other hand, if Unix is perfect, why the hell > are > > > > people working on it ? If Unix promotes innovation, why is nobody > using > > > > it ? Would you trust you ATM machine to Linux ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ""Jim Dixon"" wrote in message > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > >> THE PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE B > > > >> > > > >> ABSTRACT > > > >> B is a computer language designed by D. M. Ritchie and K. L. > Thompson, > > > >> for primarily non-numeric applications such as system programming. > > > >> These typically involve complex logical decision-making, and > > > >> processing of integers, characters, and bit strings. On the H6070 TSS > > > >> system, B programs are usually much easier to write and understand > > > >> than assembly language programs, and object code efficiency is almost > > > >> as good. Implementation of simple TSS subsystems is an especially > > > >> appropriate use for B. This > > > > technical > > > >> report contains a description of the MH-TSS (Honeywell 6070) version > > > >> of B (by S. C. Johnson), and a tutorial introduction to most of the > > > >> features of the language (by B. W. Kernighan). > > > >> > > > >> Ken Thompson > > > >> The principal inventor of the Unix operating system and author of > > > >> the B language, the predecessor of C. > > > >> > > > >> In the early days Ken used to hand-cut Unix distribution tapes, often > > > >> with > > > > a > > > >> note that read "Love, ken". Old-timers still use his first name > > > >> (sometimes uncapitalised, because it's a login name and mail address) > > > >> in third-person reference; it is widely understood (on Usenet in > > > >> particular) that without > > > > a > > > >> last name "Ken" refers only to Ken Thompson. Similarly, Dennis > without > > > > last > > > >> name means Dennis Ritchie (and he is often known as dmr). > > > >> > > > >> Ken was first hired to work on the Multics project, which was a huge > > > >> production with many people working on it. Multics was supposed to > > > >> support hundreds of on-line logins but could barely handle three. > > > >> > > > >> In 1969, when Bell Labs withdrew from the project, Ken got fed up > with > > > >> Multics and went off to write his own operating system. People said > > > >> "well, if zillions of people wrote Multics, then an OS written by one > > > >> guy must be Unix!". There was some joking about eunichs as well. > > > >> > > > >> Ken's wife Bonnie and son Corey (then 18 months old) went to visit > >
Re: Redundancy design question [7:6646]
ISDN is not so cheap in cali unless you can get Centrex.. Brian "Sonic" Whalen Success = Preparation + Opportunity On Thu, 31 May 2001, Michael L. Williams wrote: > Well, having more than one router connected to the same WAN connection still > leaves a single point of failure. Where I work, we have hundreds of remotes > sites, each of which has 2 routers connected together to the remote LAN > using HSRP. One router has a frame relay connection, and the other has an > ISDN dial-back up interface to the same WAN destination (Central Site). > This way if the primary circuit goes down, the HSRP priority gets reduced > (even on a subinterface level) until the connection is completely down, thus > router 2 then invokes the ISDN dials. ISDN is cheap, so this sounds like > a good method to me for providing redundance without having to mess with > trying to connect 2 routers to a single WAN connection.. > > My 2 cents > > Mike W. > > "Jon" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I've been reading about designing physical redundancy into networks, by > > having hot standby devices and using HSRP between them. As an example, if > > a site has a single router and a single core switch, these are points of > > risk. By adding a second core switch and a second router, any hardware > > failure should be overcome by the standby device taking over. If all the > > servers and wiring closet switches are multi-homed to both core switches, > > users shouldn't notice that a fault has occured. (I assume that the loss > > of a wiring closet switch is acceptable -- perhaps local spares are > > sufficient). > > > > However, if I only have one WAN circuit coming into the facility, it can > > only be connected to one router at a time, right? So, if the active > > router fails, how does the WAN connectivity fail over, short of an > > operator moving the cable to the second router? I'm not trying to address > > WAN circuit redundancy or multi-homing, that's a different worm-can to > > open. > > > > Is there some way to have both routers connected to the same WAN circuit? > > Something along the lines of a WYE-cable that connects both routers to the > > demarc connection? Or is this something that the circuit provider would > > address with their equipement (for a fee, I'm sure)? > > > > If this has been hashed over in the past, I couldn't find it in the > > archives. So, if we've covered this before, could someone share the key > > search words to locate the discussion? > > > > -jon- > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 > > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6939&t=6646 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? [7:6940]
training for a mouse, how does an admin like that make it through the day? Brian "Sonic" Whalen Success = Preparation + Opportunity On Thu, 31 May 2001, Jason wrote: > This is becoming one of those why do NT guys look down on Unix guys > thing. I once seen a Unix admin attend a NT course and was rejected by > the trainer on the first day because he doesn't know how to use a mouse, and > the trainer insisted that he is not going to train someone how to use the > mouse on a Admin course. > > > ""Priscilla Oppenheimer"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > There really was an NB which stood for New B. It's wasn't a joke. ;-) > > > > Priscilla > > > > At 07:11 PM 5/31/01, Howard C. Berkowitz wrote: > > >Basic Computer Programming Language, which became B, which became C. > > > > > > > > > >B and New B. > > > > > > > >Priscilla > > > > > > > >At 06:39 PM 5/31/01, Howard C. Berkowitz wrote: > > > >> >Want to make any UNIX-head apoplex? Remind them that DOS is UNIX > > >subset. > > > >>>The multi-tasking & multi-threaded functions were dropped because > there > > > >>>weren't enough bits in the registers for the Intel 8088. These were > > added > > > >>>back in when the hardware for PC's was available. However, they did > add > > > >>>better mnemonics for the UNIX commands so 'ls' became 'dir'. 'Easy' > > > >>>translates to 'stupid' somehow. But even so it's UNIX! DOS is UNIX! > > > >>>tee-hee. > > > >>> > > > >>>DOS clowns. > > > >>>UNIX dweebs. > > > >>>NT geeks. > > > >>>Cisco nerds. > > > >>>Where's Diane Arbus when we need her? > > > >>> > > > >>>- susan > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>Get back to the origins of the name UNIX. Pronounced aloud, is there > > > >>an English word that comes to mind? > > > >> > > > >>The ancestor of UNIX is MULTICS. UNIX is castrated MULTICS. > > > >> > > > >>Extra credit for the two predecessors of C. (No, the first one isn't > A). > > > > > > > > > > > >Priscilla Oppenheimer > > > >http://www.priscilla.com > > > > > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > > http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6940&t=6940 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Control traffic of NetMeeting on routers? [7:6727]
queueing or rate limiting on the wan interface?? Brian "Sonic" Whalen Success = Preparation + Opportunity On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, Thomas wrote: > Hi All - I wonder if there is anyway, to control the NetMeeting traffic on > the routers/switches? Since WAN pipes are the bottle neck, I don't want to > block the NetMeeting traffic, but apply some kind of policy to the bandwidth > of the Video/Audio conference piece of NetMeeting to ensure that it won't > kill the pipe... Thanks in advance! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6942&t=6727 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? [7:6941]
Damn this thread has gone on awhile, use the best tool for the job at hand and move on. Brian "Sonic" Whalen Success = Preparation + Opportunity On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, Christopher Kolp wrote: > I wouldn't necessarily say that... > > I'm a "unix guy" and will be the first to admit that a lot of > us are fanatics. I'm not sure what your experience is but ive > seen a LOT of arguemnts, ie. solaris vs. aix, sco vs. linux, > linux vs. freebsd, etc etc etc. > > And what is a "true" unix guy?? Lots of experience? Working > for a vendor? I don't understand. > > -ck > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > Arumugam Sundarum > > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 1:43 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? > > [7:6716] > > > > > > you are talking bullshit man.. > > A true UNIX guys do not hate another UNIX systems. > > They simply accept as if they are part of the family. > > > > This is totally different from windows...what a jerk !!! > > > > rgds. > > UNIX to the world > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: Donald B Johnson jr [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 2:43 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on > > we NT guys? > > > [7:6641] > > > > > > Actually UNIX is a bunch of fanatic sects i.e. the sco guys > > hate the sun > > > guys hate the hp guys and so on. Linux is a full blown cult. > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Circusnuts" > > > To: > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 7:46 PM > > > Subject: Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? > > > [7:6344] > > > > > > > > > > Because Unix is all a cult !!! The only thing worse than > > Unix guys, are > > > > SNA/ Main Frame dudes (with their VTAM's, FEP's, & Lu Lu > > Sessions :o) > > > > > > > > Pray for me- I start Unix classes Friday :-P > > > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: Jim Bond > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 10:14 PM > > > > Subject: Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on > > we NT guys? > > > [7:6335] > > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh yeah?! I'm win2000 roll out project manager for a > > > > > fortune 500 company. I make $150 per hour. Hope you > > > > > can figure out, SMART Unix guy. > > > > > > > > > > And Chuck, no problem. I just don't like some people > > > > > (like SMART Russ) knows a little than others then show > > > > > off that much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Russ Kreigh wrote: > > > > > > We look down upon you because you have to brag about > > > > > > how much you make. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > > > From: "Jim Bond" > > > > > > To: > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 7:40 PM > > > > > > Subject: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on > > > > > > we NT guys? [7:6323] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > UNIX guys, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I make $240K per year, how much you make? Why you > > > > > > guys > > > > > > > look down on us??? I don't get it... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jim > > > > > > > NT guy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > > > Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great > > > > > > prices > > > > > > > http://auctions.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > > > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > > > > > > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > > > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > > > > > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 > > > > > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > > > > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6941&t=6941 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Opinions on Cisco Access Pro AP-EC's [7:1045]
Not just on the CiscoPro AP, but on all IOS routers (as far as I know), you must have an Enable password set on the router in order to enter Privileged mode from the AUX or VTY ports. Only the CONS port can enter Privileged mode on a router lacking an Enable password. Unfortunately, you must be in Privileged mode to set the password, so you are in a Catch 22 until you solve your problem with the CONS port. -- Ron Bandes, CCNA, MCSE, BA CS, Certified Technical Trainer Cloud Nine Networks, LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] remove Spam_me_not. to email me ""No Data"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I have an AccessPro sitting in a computer and still > not in my lab. It's an ISA card with 3 interfaces on > the back, 1 ethernet, 1 serial, and 1 aux port. It > runs regular 2500 IOS software but the memory > configuration if I recall is 4/8 and is not > expandable. There are other interface configurations > just like the rest of the 2500 series but none have > more than two routing interfaces. > > There is no console port but there is a port called > PCBus (or something like that) that takes com 2 on a > pc. (conflicting stories as to whether one must > disable com 2 in BIOS or not) My PCBus interface is > administratively shutdown right now and I, for some > unknown to me reason, cannot get into privilaged mode > from either aux or ethernet (I type 'enable' and get a > 'no password specified' message). During my quest to > solve this problem I have found virtually no > documentation from cisco about this little sucker, no > password reset instructions or anything. Called Cisco > and no help there really so I am just left to > tinkering until I can finally get access to it. > > As far as an AccessPro vs. a 2500 series it comes down > to this. If you already know a bit about the > AccessPro you can pick them up used for under $200 and > add another fixed config router (with limited > capabilities and two interfaces) into your network. > With a 2500 or 1600 you get a fixed config router that > you can put larger IOS files onto for at least double > the price. Kind of a toss up if you dont have any exp > or documentation with the APs as documentation on the > 2500s and 1600s is abundant. > > > Ben > > --- Drew Simonis wrote: > > I saw this device mentioned on another mailing list > > I > > read as a good item for a home lab. Basically, its > > a > > 2501 on a PC card. I wonder why I haven't seen this > > > > device mentioned in this group as a good piece to > > have. > > > > Are there any issues with this product that make it > > less suitable than a 1601, 2501, etc?? > > > > Curious... > > -Ds > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices > http://auctions.yahoo.com/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6943&t=1045 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Anyone going to Networkers? [7:6719]
That 1600 buck pricetag is too steep for me, my employer will not reimburse, I am bummed. Brian "Sonic" Whalen Success = Preparation + Opportunity On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, Jon wrote: > Networkers L.A. is in a few short weeks. I'll be there, probably wishing > everyone would turn the air conditioning up. > > Is anyone else from the list attending? Enough interest to put together a > gathering on evening? Perhaps Sunday, before we get too caught up in the > week's events -- assuming most folks are arriving early to attend a power > session. > > Any ideas on how to decorate our nametags to show we're part of the elite > GroupStudy following? (Following what, I know not, but I suspect it's a > trail of Howard's bad jokes). > > -jon- > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6944&t=6719 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Repost: GIADDR and Secondary Interface problems - help [7:6945]
I'll definitely email you / post back when i get back to it. I need to through our change control process request which will be at least a week before I will be able to start working on it again. I hope this "solution" works! ""W. Alan Robertson"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > So did it work? I've been waiting all day to hear... :) > > Alan~ > > - Original Message - > From: "Kenneth" > To: > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 7:38 AM > Subject: Re: Repost: GIADDR and Secondary Interface problems - help > [7:6741] > > > > Thanks Alan. > > > > Yeah, we do have a maintenance window for this so rebooting is not > really a > > problem except I'm targeting 104 weeks of uptime!!! :-) Guess > that'll have > > to wait another 104 weeks > > > > I'll give the 1st 2 ideas a try first and hopefully that fixes their > > problem. > > > > Thanks for the help, you guys have been great!!! > > > > Kenneth > > > > > > ""W. Alan Robertson"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > Kenneth, > > > > > > It sounds to me like a bug... Have you checked the Cisco bug > > > database? > > > > > > Short of that, here's what I'd do: > > > > > > First, remove the ip helper-address from the interface, and then > add > > > it again... See what happpens. It's possible that the ip > > > helper-address function checks the interfaces primary IP address > when > > > the command is added, but has no mechanism to check it again after > > > being initialized. > > > > > > If that doesn't work, I'd remove it again, shut down the > interface, > > > bring the interface back up, and then add the help address again. > > > > > > As a last resort, reloading the router should clear the problem, > but I > > > understand your reluctance to do so... 100% uptime is a noble > > > pursuit, but there's no avoiding maintenance. I don't suppose you > > > have a maintenance window, do you? > > > > > > Hope this helps... > > > > > > Alan > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: "Kenneth" > > > To: > > > Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 9:10 PM > > > Subject: Repost: GIADDR and Secondary Interface problems - help > > > [7:6695] > > > > > > > > > > Hi, guys. It's been a while since I've posted something here but > I'm > > > pretty > > > > stumped with this problem somehow. Anyway, here's my problem: > > > > > > > > Remote office subnet: 192.168.5.0 255.255.255.0 > > > > Plan to change subnet into 192.168.19.0 255.255.255.0 > > > > Router relaying dhcp requests to 192.168.1.11 (DHCP Server in > > > Central site) > > > > Current fa0/0 interface on LAN: 192.168.5.1 255.255.255.0 > > > > > > > > I recently configured the interface to have > > > > 192.168.19.1 as its primary address > > > > 192.168.5.1 as its secondary address > > > > > > > > On the DHCP Server, I've deleted the 192.168.5.0 scope and > activated > > > the > > > > 192.168.19.0 scope > > > > > > > > The reason I have 2 ip addresses on the FastEthernet interface > of > > > the router > > > > is to allow people who haven't rebooted their computer to still > be > > > able to > > > > access email and services at the central site and print to their > > > local LAN > > > > LPR printers... > > > > > > > > The problem I'm having is that once the computers have rebooted, > and > > > I did a > > > > debug ip dhcp server events, packets, linkage, I keep seeing the > > > router > > > > still setting the GIADDR of the request as 192.168.5.1 ... since > > > it's > > > > forwarding this information, the DHCP server on the central site > > > wasn't > > > > responding because of the non-existence of the 192.168.5.0 scope > > > > > > > > Reading Cisco's documentation, I thought the router uses the > primary > > > ip > > > > address of the interface as its GIADDR? > > > > > > > > I have read something about ip dhcp smart-relay but I doubt it > > > applies to > > > > this problem... > > > > > > > > BTW, this is the way that it should be done and I know a lot of > > > people hate > > > > the "secondary" ip address but I'm really trying to make this > change > > > as > > > > transparent to the users as possible! > > > > > > > > Thanks guys! > > > > > > > > Kenneth > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6945&t=6945 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
Absolutely correct here.. Brian "Sonic" Whalen Success = Preparation + Opportunity On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, Belt, Louie wrote: > I filled out my survey and told them I wanted it to stay a two day lab - > and if anything - make it tougher. The explosion of materials available to > help people get though the written and prepare for the lab has taken some of > the challenge out of the process in my opinion. I would prefer they keep it > a 2 day lab, make it mean as h*** and keep the prestige in the cert. I also > told them I did not want them to stop issuing the medal for those who > succeed. > > Louie > > -Original Message- > From: CCIE Wanna BE > To: Belt, Louie; '[EMAIL PROTECTED] ' > Sent: 6/1/01 8:23 AM > Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > So what is everyone's take? > --- "Belt, Louie" wrote: > > That is simply one possible solution. They have > > sent a survey out to all of > > the CCIE's to get their feedback and suggestions. > > > > Louie > > > > -Original Message- > > From: CCIE Wanna BE > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 6/1/01 5:35 AM > > Subject: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > > A Cisco manager/CCIE told me that Cisco was planing > > on > > moving from the two day CCIE lab, to a one day > > (because of the back log). But the 1 day isn't > > going > > to be easier, it's going to be harder > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - > > only $35 > > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 > a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6946&t=6735 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
Louie- I don't think we're talk'n Apple to Apples here... During the early CCIE exams, I was told candidates were able to use their own notes during the test (if Pamela Forsythe is out there, she could confirm this rumor) & can you imagine how much "easier" the lab would have been with versions 9.0, 10.0 or even 11.0(22) IOS. I agree there's more information available, but after having sat through a 2 week CCIE lab prep class... I think the information just gets you in the ballpark. Things like bad time management & poor interpretations, are big obstacles no book can fix. I believe the exam is as hard (if not harder) than it's ever been. Man- this cup of coffee I'm drink'n must not be decaff :o) Phil - Original Message - From: Louie Belt To: Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:16 PM Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > When the CCIE cert first came about there were not 100+ books avilable to > help you pass it. There were not a multitude of online labs, lab study > guides, study groups, ... Since all of those items are now available, I > feel the bar has been lowered. I'm for putting it back where it was. > > Additionally I'm studying for my second CCIE cert, I sincerely hope that it > is much tougher than my first. I want to maintain the value of the cert. > > Louie > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Michael L. Williams > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 12:09 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > I agree with you. It's awful easy for someone who's already gotten their > CCIE (which when they passed the lab probably could be quoted as saying > something like "that was the most difficult thing I've ever seen") to now > say "Sure.. make it as difficult as possible " > > I don't know many CCIEs personally. Only a couple, and both of them said > that given the time constraints of the lab (2 days), it is extremely > difficult. So I don't think jamming it into 1 day just because Cisco is too > cheap to spring for more testing centers to keep up with demand is a > "resonable solution". Isn't this why Cisco is contemplating making it 1 > day? Not to "raise the bar" of the level of the exam, but simply because > they're testing centers can't handle the demand. Mashing into 1 day, IMHO, > would be a very poor decision. > > Agreeing with Brad, do all of the CCIEs that are out there have a problem > with leaving the bar where it was when you passed it? It only seems fair. > > Mike W. > > "Bradley J. Wilson" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > If I weren't up to the challenge, I wouldn't be on this newsgroup. Are > you > > up to the challenge of leaving the bar at the same height that it was when > > *you* passed the test? I personally think the test is difficult enough as > > it is. Am I a wimp because of that? Do we need to dump some dirt on the > > top of Everest now that it's been conquered by someone else ahead of me? > > > > If Cisco wants to make the test "tougher," they're well within their > rights > > to do so. I just hope they don't call it the "CCIE" - call it something > > different, and reset the numbers to zero (or 1025, whichever). > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: Louie Belt > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:33 AM > > Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > > > > Any CCIE or CCIE candidate worth his salt would want the lab to be > tougher. > > A number of study aids are now available that were not in the past. This > > has somewhat lessened the difficulty of the process (as witnessed by the > > backlog of people taking the lab after breezing through the written). > > Making it tougher is just a method of counterbalancing all of the > increased > > study aids and maintaining the value of the CCIE cert. > > > > If you truly want to obtain your CCIE then you should want it to be as > > difficult as possible, otherwise where is the value in the cert? If you > are > > not up to the challenge, then don't make the attempt. > > > > As for who should evaluate the CCIE program - most (not all)employers > > couldn't begin to answer the questions about what is needed from a CCIE. > > The biggest employer of CCIE's is Cisco (by far) so they should already > have > > an idea of what is needed. Cisco has been respectful enough of the CCIE > > population to also ask for their input and most have given it willingly. > > > > My main interested is in preserving the value of the CCIE cert. I am > > currently studying for my 2nd CCIE cert and still hope they make it > tougher > > (before I complete it). I also hope they make the recertification tests > > tougher as well. > > > > I'm up to the challenge - are you? > > > > > > Louie > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > Bradley J. Wil
Re: Book club [7:6811]
Is this http://tcbc.booksonline.com perhaps? Brian "Sonic" Whalen Success = Preparation + Opportunity On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, MIRSKY Carl wrote: > A while back there was information posed on a book club where you could get > several CCIE books for like $10 and then only have to buy X books > afterwards. Does anyone have the name or URL for this? Thanks > > "Put yer seat belt on, I wanna try somethin'. I saw it in a cartoon once and > I'm pretty sure it'll work !" >, > /'^ ^'\ > ((o)-(o)) > --oOOO--(_)--OOOo- > Carl Mirsky CCNP, CCDP, SCSA, MCSE > Technical Solutions Architect > Covansys ( www.covansys.com ) > 1750 E. Golf Rd. #1100 > Schaumburg, IL 60173 > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Ph: 847-969-3054 > .oooO > ( ) Oooo. > -\ (---( )--- > \_) ) / >(_/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6948&t=6811 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: FastEthernet Adapter for 7206 - How do I enable? [7:6411]
I threw out that response because I saw for example that the pa-8e with a rev below 1.14, altho fine on a 7206, is problematic on a vxr. I was not sure which 7206 flavor was being discussed. Brian "Sonic" Whalen Success = Preparation + Opportunity On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, Daniel Cotts wrote: > The PA-2FE is supported in Cisco IOS Releases 12.1(5)E, 12.0(15)S, 12.1(6), > 12.2(1), 12.2(2)T and after. > HTH > > > -Original Message- > > From: Brian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 8:57 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: FastEthernet Adapter for 7206 - How do I enable? [7:6411] > > > > > > ancient hardware rev?? > > > > Brian "Sonic" Whalen > > Success = Preparation + Opportunity > > > > > > On Wed, 30 May 2001, Robert Fowler wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I've been beating my head on the side of this router. I've > > searched the CCO > > > on how to enable the PA-2FE adapter, and found some information on > > > microcode. Then I found out the IOS I've upgraded to > > (12.1.(3)) already has > > > a current version built in. I don't recall learning anything about > > Microcode > > > in any of my studying. How does it differ from the IOS? > > Anyway, the adapter > > > card will not enable, and when I do a show diag 1 I get > > this:(see below) > > > show that it is powered off. I've searched everywhere to > > find the command > > to > > > power it on. Any suggestions? > > > > > > Slot 1: > > > Unknown (type 548) Port adapter > > > Port adapter is disabled deactivated powered off > > > Port adapter insertion time unknown > > > EEPROM contents at hardware discovery: > > > Hardware Revision: 1.0 > > > PCB Serial Number: MIC0516000Y > > > Part Number : 73-5419-06 > > > Board Revision : A0 > > > RMA Test History : 00 > > > RMA Number : 0-0-0-0 > > > RMA History : 00 > > > Deviation Number : 0-0 > > > Model: PA-2FE-TX > > > Part Number : 800-08350-06 > > > EEPROM format version 4 > > > EEPROM contents (hex): > > > 0x00: 04 FF 40 02 24 41 01 00 C1 8B 4D 49 43 30 35 31 > > > 0x10: 36 30 30 30 59 82 49 15 2B 06 42 41 30 03 00 81 > > > 0x20: 00 00 00 00 04 00 80 00 00 00 00 CB 94 50 41 2D > > > 0x30: 32 46 45 2D 54 58 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 > > > 0x40: 20 C0 46 03 20 00 20 9E 06 FF FF FF FF FF FF FF > > > 0x50: FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF > > > 0x60: FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF > > > 0x70: FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF FF > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank You, > > > Robert Fowler > > > Network Administrator > > > MasTec, Inc. > > > Office: 305.406.3150 > > > Fax: 305.599.7085 > > > Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > MasTec Building the e-World > > > > > > Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this > > transmittal, > > > including any attachment, is privileged and confidential > > information and > > is > > > intended only for the person or entity to which it is > > addressed. If you > > are > > > neither the intended recipient nor the employee or agent > > responsible for > > > delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are > > hereby notified > > > that any disclosure, copying or distribution or the taking > > of any action in > > > reliance on the contents of this transmittal is strictly > > prohibited. If > > you > > > have received this transmittal in error, please contact the sender > > > immediately and delete this transmittal from any computer > > or other data > > > bank. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6949&t=6411 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
I agree there is no way to talk apples to apples - too many things have changed - but don't forget you no longer have to deal with LAT, X.25, CLNS, DEC, Banyan Vines, Appollo, Appletalk or ATM Lane. (Voice was already on the lab prior to these items being removed.) My concern is with the material that is not focused on teaching you networking (I have no problem with that), but on the material the simply teaches you how to pass the test (kind of like all of the Microsoft braindump material available - desinged only to help you pass the test). I see too much material as of late that is way too focused on passing the lab, not on learning networking. Louie -Original Message- From: Circusnuts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 11:01 PM To: Louie Belt; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] Louie- I don't think we're talk'n Apple to Apples here... During the early CCIE exams, I was told candidates were able to use their own notes during the test (if Pamela Forsythe is out there, she could confirm this rumor) & can you imagine how much "easier" the lab would have been with versions 9.0, 10.0 or even 11.0(22) IOS. I agree there's more information available, but after having sat through a 2 week CCIE lab prep class... I think the information just gets you in the ballpark. Things like bad time management & poor interpretations, are big obstacles no book can fix. I believe the exam is as hard (if not harder) than it's ever been. Man- this cup of coffee I'm drink'n must not be decaff :o) Phil - Original Message - From: Louie Belt To: Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:16 PM Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > When the CCIE cert first came about there were not 100+ books avilable to > help you pass it. There were not a multitude of online labs, lab study > guides, study groups, ... Since all of those items are now available, I > feel the bar has been lowered. I'm for putting it back where it was. > > Additionally I'm studying for my second CCIE cert, I sincerely hope that it > is much tougher than my first. I want to maintain the value of the cert. > > Louie > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Michael L. Williams > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 12:09 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > I agree with you. It's awful easy for someone who's already gotten their > CCIE (which when they passed the lab probably could be quoted as saying > something like "that was the most difficult thing I've ever seen") to now > say "Sure.. make it as difficult as possible " > > I don't know many CCIEs personally. Only a couple, and both of them said > that given the time constraints of the lab (2 days), it is extremely > difficult. So I don't think jamming it into 1 day just because Cisco is too > cheap to spring for more testing centers to keep up with demand is a > "resonable solution". Isn't this why Cisco is contemplating making it 1 > day? Not to "raise the bar" of the level of the exam, but simply because > they're testing centers can't handle the demand. Mashing into 1 day, IMHO, > would be a very poor decision. > > Agreeing with Brad, do all of the CCIEs that are out there have a problem > with leaving the bar where it was when you passed it? It only seems fair. > > Mike W. > > "Bradley J. Wilson" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > If I weren't up to the challenge, I wouldn't be on this newsgroup. Are > you > > up to the challenge of leaving the bar at the same height that it was when > > *you* passed the test? I personally think the test is difficult enough as > > it is. Am I a wimp because of that? Do we need to dump some dirt on the > > top of Everest now that it's been conquered by someone else ahead of me? > > > > If Cisco wants to make the test "tougher," they're well within their > rights > > to do so. I just hope they don't call it the "CCIE" - call it something > > different, and reset the numbers to zero (or 1025, whichever). > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: Louie Belt > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:33 AM > > Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > > > > Any CCIE or CCIE candidate worth his salt would want the lab to be > tougher. > > A number of study aids are now available that were not in the past. This > > has somewhat lessened the difficulty of the process (as witnessed by the > > backlog of people taking the lab after breezing through the written). > > Making it tougher is just a method of counterbalancing all of the > increased > > study aids and maintaining the value of the CCIE cert. > > > > If you truly want to obtain your CCIE then you should want it to be as > > difficult as possible, otherwise where is the value in the cert? If you > are > > not up to the chall
Undeliverable: Cisco Certification Digest V2 #1332 [7:6951]
Your message To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Cisco Certification Digest V2 #1332 Sent:Sat, 2 Jun 2001 11:51:27 +1000 did not reach the following recipient(s): Bruce Horkings on Sat, 2 Jun 2001 12:32:53 +1000 The recipient could not be processed due to congestion in the message transfer service The MTS-ID of the original message is: c=AU;a= ;p=Crane;l=HERMES0106020232LYJBSDDA MSEXCH:MSExchangeMTA:TRADELINK:HERMES [GroupStudy.com removed an attachment of type application/ms-tnef] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6951&t=6951 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
VPN question [7:6952]
Hello, I'm afraid I'm clueless about VPN's other than basic traversing of rfc1918 IPs over a public network. What Im wondering is that my cable connection to the internet is handled by a cisco2610. On the other side of my work is an Intel Netsructure VPN gateway use 3des as their encryption. This else look pretty basic. Has anyone configured a cisco->intel vpn? Any tips if so would be appreciated. Thanks in advance, Dave Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6952&t=6952 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subject: Re: TCP Sliding Windows question [7:6899]
Comments within and below. > sort of continuing, although on an IPX track > > was reading Radia Perlman's book the other day, and she mentions that > SPX > has a window size of 1. Now, I seem to remember from my DOS/Win3.11 > days > that there was some kind of SPX burst facility available (with addition > TSR > drivers). Are you referring to packet burst? In essence, this is what you described(watch wrap): http://support.novell.com/cgi- bin/search/searchtid.cgi?/2947728.htm It was my understanding that many folks wanted to disable this capability and the article makes mention of this in a note on the bottom: "Note: Customers have reported that the MS Client for NetWare may cause high utilization on NetWare servers.. Disabling the Packet Burst functionality of the MS Client resolves the high utilization problem. According to one customer, the following registry edit disables Packet Burst on the MS Client:" Still, the intent was good. Many folks also associate sliding windows with SPX. Technically, that is not correct. True windowing did not really happen until SPX II, which also facilitated orderly closure of the connection (if requested). Wasn't really au-fait with networking back int those days, > but > would I be right in assuming that this adds some kind of sliding window > functionality to SPX? SPX II to be more precise. In a way, one can regard packet burst as a windowing mechanism, but it was not as refined as SPX II (IMHO). The real issue is why Novell missed the boat on IP. Too little, too late. I am a big fan of Novell Netware. It is a rock solid NOS. Unfortunately market share typically dictates what will be used. The Beta vs. VHS wars are a prime example. Yes, I still have a working Betamax :-) v/r, Paul Werner Get your own "800" number Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6954&t=6899 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
As far as this thread goes Ill put in my two cents worth. Im just starting to study specifically for the written right now having just gotten my CCNP so I am in with those studying for the lab now (or real soon). Personally I think Cisco could go right ahead and make the lab as hard as they want. In all honesty I never see the lab being as hard as the orals a 'pure science' graduate student must take. It is only, and will probably ever only be a technical exam and will never even come close to the difficulty of a theoretical examination where new ideas must digested and expounded upon. Everyone has always known what to study, routing and switching on cisco hardware/software, these are not massively huge topics as a fairly comprehensive library would only fill a couple bookshelves. In fact I wouldnt mind if the test was a single question 'Redesign the overall topology of the Internet with regards to emerging traffic patterns expounding upon different paradigms of routing. Give specific configuration examples at all levels of the network using any given piece of Cisco equipment.' The current lab is not that hard and will never be that hard, but if it was I would not be disappointed, I would personally like such a challenge. CCIE is not the be all and end all of knowledge; it is just a verification of technical skills on a small selection of platforms. If it was made more difficult I would not begrudge anyone else who achieved the certification before it was made harder, I am comfortable with my skills and abilities and really feel no need to use a paper certification as a crutch for the future. Studying for the written and lab though does help me to focus and explore routing so I continue to do it. In conclusion, it should be as hard or as easy as Cisco wants it to be, I am confident that I will still pass no matter what when I take the lab a year from now. Ben, CCNP --- Circusnuts wrote: > Louie- I don't think we're talk'n Apple to Apples > here... > > During the early CCIE exams, I was told candidates > were able to use their > own notes during the test (if Pamela Forsythe is out > there, she could > confirm this rumor) & can you imagine how much > "easier" the lab would have > been with versions 9.0, 10.0 or even 11.0(22) IOS. > I agree there's more > information available, but after having sat through > a 2 week CCIE lab prep > class... I think the information just gets you in > the ballpark. Things > like bad time management & poor interpretations, are > big obstacles no book > can fix. I believe the exam is as hard (if not > harder) than it's ever been. > > Man- this cup of coffee I'm drink'n must not be > decaff :o) > Phil > > - Original Message - > From: Louie Belt > To: > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:16 PM > Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > > When the CCIE cert first came about there were not > 100+ books avilable to > > help you pass it. There were not a multitude of > online labs, lab study > > guides, study groups, ... Since all of those > items are now available, I > > feel the bar has been lowered. I'm for putting it > back where it was. > > > > Additionally I'm studying for my second CCIE cert, > I sincerely hope that > it > > is much tougher than my first. I want to maintain > the value of the cert. > > > > Louie > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > Michael L. Williams > > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 12:09 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? > [7:6735] > > > > > > I agree with you. It's awful easy for someone > who's already gotten their > > CCIE (which when they passed the lab probably > could be quoted as saying > > something like "that was the most difficult thing > I've ever seen") to now > > say "Sure.. make it as difficult as > possible " > > > > I don't know many CCIEs personally. Only a > couple, and both of them said > > that given the time constraints of the lab (2 > days), it is extremely > > difficult. So I don't think jamming it into 1 day > just because Cisco is > too > > cheap to spring for more testing centers to keep > up with demand is a > > "resonable solution". Isn't this why Cisco is > contemplating making it 1 > > day? Not to "raise the bar" of the level of the > exam, but simply because > > they're testing centers can't handle the demand. > Mashing into 1 day, > IMHO, > > would be a very poor decision. > > > > Agreeing with Brad, do all of the CCIEs that are > out there have a problem > > with leaving the bar where it was when you passed > it? It only seems fair. > > > > Mike W. > > > > "Bradley J. Wilson" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > If I weren't up to the challenge, I wouldn't be > on this newsgroup. Are > > you > > > up to the challenge of leaving the bar at the > same height that it was > when > > > *you* passed the test? I pe
Re: PC to PC thru 2 routers??? [7:6877]
Bob What king of routing are you using. Make sure if you have static routes that you have an entry for each of the subnets. To make it alot easier enable rip routing and also make sure that you set the default gateway on your pc's to their corresponding router interface ip. or post configs to help you more George, Head Janitor, CCNA, CCDA Cisco Systems, Inc. ""Bob Lepine"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hi, I'm Bob, a computer trainer. I have a lab set up with 2 PCs with 2 > routers between, a 3600 and 2600. I have both end PCs on a 192.168.0.0 > network going through my e0/1 between routers on a 10.0.0 nw. I can ping > from router to router, but not from router to the outer PCs., nor of course > can I ping from outer pc to outer pc. Is there something I'm not considering > right? > > > -- > Bob Lepine > MCSE,MCDBA,CNA,CCNA,MCT Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6956&t=6877 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
test please ignore [7:6957]
test please ignore Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6957&t=6957 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? [7:6958]
UNIX is a registered trademark of SCO. Therefore, anything not SCO is NOT unix. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > abc > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 4:02 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: another OT: why you UNIX guys look down on we NT guys? > [7:6864] > > > 1) linux is not UNIX, similiar but not the same, check > it out before > speak it out. > > 2) Cisco IOS is Unix based since then. > > 3) I just hardly believe that, Unix can not be used GUI > too. Please > tell me what is x-windows, CDE. > > 4)Please check out the information before you post. > > 5)The technical knowledge of this jason guy make me laugh > and tyring to > show off... > > Correct me if i am wrong. > abc Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6958&t=6958 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Book club [7:6811]
Is this the same book club that sent me 3 books today? I don't even know how they got my name and address and without me even having the slightest idea as to why they sent me the books, A+, CCDA, Solaris Admin. Why in the world would I want these 3 books, A+ Did that 6 years back, Solaris Admin-What is it? And CCDA-No interest. If they had shipped me 3 CCIE books, I might have considered it-maybe. My question is has anyone is this group ever got such an offer without your knowledge and consent? And most important, what's the next step? Shall I bang their heads with a 2501? ;-) _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6959&t=6811 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Subject: Re: TCP Sliding Windows question [7:6899]
Priscilla's explanation is right on the money I have added a few comments to expand on some areas that were not mentioned. See below. > TCP sequences bytes. A lot of people assume that TCP sequences packets > or > segments, but that's not true. > > The sequence number in a TCP header is the sequence number of the first > byte in the payload. It's not a segment number. The ACK is the number of > > the next byte of payload expected. It's not a segment number. The > sliding > window keeps track of how many bytes have been sent and acknowledged. Very correct. The only way to see this is to "count the bytes" as the go across the wire. To help a little bit, I have included an ASCII capture summary for a TTCP transfer (watch wrap): http://www.west- point.org/users/usma1983/40768/chesinc/docs/ttcp2.txt This is not a theoretical capture, rather a real 10 minute transfer between two windows hosts using a direct connection with a crossover cable. If you look at the first sequence number, you will see it is SEQ=20602846 . Look at the window size and the packet length size (8760 and 1460 respectively). We should expect to see five more packets cross the wire before an ACK is sent. You will note that the next sequence number (SEQ=20604306) reflects an additional 1460 bytes. Finally, look at the ACK. Note that the ACK is indicating, "Hey, I want to see the **Next** 1460 bytes, hence the number ACK=20611606. This is considered a positive or expectational acknowledgement. The almost full headers are here(watch wrap): http://www.west- point.org/users/usma1983/40768/chesinc/docs/ttcp.txt > The 3-way handshake kind of breaks this rule, which is probably why > people > get confused. They never go past the 3-way handshake. With the 3-way > handshake, there are no payload bytes. The recipient's ACK number is > nonetheless one more than the other side's SEQ number. What is equally important is that the ISN (Initial sequence number) should be a truly random value, so as not to allow hackers to spoof a connection. There are some pretty well documented cases where this was not done, most recently with the CBOS on the 600 series routers. Also, one point of note is the issue of selective acknowledgements and negative acknowledgements. Originally, most Internet hosts did not have a TCP/IP stack that incorporated SACKs. With the advent of Solaris 8 and Win 98, SACKs were employed in major operating systems. The effect of the selective acknowledgment (as opposed to the negative acknowledgement is as follows. In the instance where you had the transfer I mentioned above, consider the situation where I received segments 1 and 2, missed segment 3, then received segments 4, 5, and 6. Would it not be a little bit more efficient to tell the server that I at least got segments 1 and 2? That is the point behind SACKs. In the case of negative acknowlegements, the intent would be to say to the server, "okay, big guy, it looks like I got everything except segment number 2. Whaddya say we resend segment number 2 just to make things complete?" Negative acknowledgments are not supported, and likely will not be supported unless the TCP specification is rewritten. Frankly, a good sliding window and SACKs seems to be sufficient for optimization. I **Strongly** agree with Priscilla's endorsement of TCP/IP Illustrated, by W. Richard Stevens. Unfortunately, it is copyrighted September, 1994. It will never be updated by the original author, since he passed away recently. My understanding is that his wife is trying to find somebody suitable to make a next edition (which is long overdue). I hope a suitable person will be found. The Stevens book is a *must* read if you want to understand TCP/IP. v/r, Paul Werner Get your own "800" number Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6960&t=6899 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
In my opinion, CCIE's are definitely needed for the internet. What I mean by that is cisco like all others needs people out there to setup and manage networks. Making the exam harder and harder may make a good CCIE candidates, however the markets usually will not wait to get the all-rounder CCxx from Cisco. Because Ms.Juniper and Mrs.Foundry are all pushing for people to be good at making and managing networks. The more reccomenders or users the better sales. When you have more CCIE's and CCNP's and of course CCNA's the more reccommenders for Cisco products. Same is the case with all products. And as long as Cisco can back the recomender with the quality products, there is a good future for CCIE's etc. Few years ago it was Novxx and Microxx certification was the way to go, how ever Novxx could not back the reccommender with quality and so may be doing the last dance now. Microxx just understood the idea but patches for greed is yet to be invented. Judge Jacksxx is still working on it. CCIE is only another level of knowledge. It probably will be seen different if the standard is to have Phd's in networking. So work hard in knowing more. Explore the unknown, expand the known. That is the only way you will be the best in what you do. CCIE is the best now, however what % of every CCIE does the world need. Should they all specialize? By the way, all the above statements are only opinions and should not be used directly or indirectly for any decision making. "No Data" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > As far as this thread goes Ill put in my two cents > worth. > > Im just starting to study specifically for the written > right now having just gotten my CCNP so I am in with > those studying for the lab now (or real soon). > Personally I think Cisco could go right ahead and make > the lab as hard as they want. In all honesty I never > see the lab being as hard as the orals a 'pure > science' graduate student must take. It is only, and > will probably ever only be a technical exam and will > never even come close to the difficulty of a > theoretical examination where new ideas must digested > and expounded upon. Everyone has always known what to > study, routing and switching on cisco > hardware/software, these are not massively huge topics > as a fairly comprehensive library would only fill a > couple bookshelves. In fact I wouldnt mind if the > test was a single question 'Redesign the overall > topology of the Internet with regards to emerging > traffic patterns expounding upon different paradigms > of routing. Give specific configuration examples at > all levels of the network using any given piece of > Cisco equipment.' The current lab is not that hard > and will never be that hard, but if it was I would not > be disappointed, I would personally like such a > challenge. CCIE is not the be all and end all of > knowledge; it is just a verification of technical > skills on a small selection of platforms. If it was > made more difficult I would not begrudge anyone else > who achieved the certification before it was made > harder, I am comfortable with my skills and abilities > and really feel no need to use a paper certification > as a crutch for the future. Studying for the written > and lab though does help me to focus and explore > routing so I continue to do it. In conclusion, it > should be as hard or as easy as Cisco wants it to be, > I am confident that I will still pass no matter what > when I take the lab a year from now. > > Ben, CCNP > > --- Circusnuts wrote: > > Louie- I don't think we're talk'n Apple to Apples > > here... > > > > During the early CCIE exams, I was told candidates > > were able to use their > > own notes during the test (if Pamela Forsythe is out > > there, she could > > confirm this rumor) & can you imagine how much > > "easier" the lab would have > > been with versions 9.0, 10.0 or even 11.0(22) IOS. > > I agree there's more > > information available, but after having sat through > > a 2 week CCIE lab prep > > class... I think the information just gets you in > > the ballpark. Things > > like bad time management & poor interpretations, are > > big obstacles no book > > can fix. I believe the exam is as hard (if not > > harder) than it's ever been. > > > > Man- this cup of coffee I'm drink'n must not be > > decaff :o) > > Phil > > > > - Original Message - > > From: Louie Belt > > To: > > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:16 PM > > Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > > > > > When the CCIE cert first came about there were not > > 100+ books avilable to > > > help you pass it. There were not a multitude of > > online labs, lab study > > > guides, study groups, ... Since all of those > > items are now available, I > > > feel the bar has been lowered. I'm for putting it > > back where it was. > > > > > > Additionally I'm studying for my second CCIE cert, > > I sincerely hope that > > it > > > is muc
Re: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735]
This message isn't a reply to anyone in specific. Something "Circusnuts" said kinda sparked some questions/thoughts Two things, IMHO, that no amount of book reading or practice in a lab can give: The ability to be a quick thinker and good troubleshooter. I know there are writings and courses on troubleshooting, I used to teach one, however, I believe that true troubleshooting skills, that separate the "good" CCNP/CCIE from the "paper" CCNP/CCIE, is a natural thing that a person either has or doesn't have. Kinda like the ability to play music by ear. Either you can do it or your can't. I learned that I had good troubleshooting skills when could (successfully) debug assembly language code that I'd written while teaching myself at the age of 12 using the trusty Commodore 64 Programmer's Reference Guide. =)Some people can see and read about common problems and learn their solutions, but it's the true troubleshooters that can use their tools and logic to zero in on problems quickly that really make the grade. Isn't the first half of the second day of the lab a kind of "think-fast" troubleshooting session? I think that is what the CCIE lab exam should (and I thought did) try to determine if someone has. Focusing on testing for "true troubleshooting" talent would definitely separate the "good" from "paper" candidates and would keep the CCIE from being "devalued". Heh, I've been typing this response for about 30 minutes now (editing this, editing that, etc), but I think I've hit on what I truly would like to see between the CCIE written/lab. The written should be used to evaluate knowledge of protocols, routing, switching, commands, etc. the lab should be used to *focus* on whether or not someone can troubleshoot. I think with enough pratice, anyone can take a lab diagram and configure the equipment properly. But fixing something that is broken takes intuition, logic more "talent" so to speak, so why not focus the lab on troubleshooting many problems over a 2 day period... for that matter, give the candidate a fully configured network when they walk in and don't give ANY information about it... then tell them "I can't ping from here to here" and let them figure it out from the ground up.. This is all just random mumblings at this point... any comments are welcome. I apologize to the group for such a long, pointless post =) As a side note... I keep seeing people say things where they draw some conclusion about the lab (or what it's difficulty should be) based on some feelings about the written exam, etc. Aren't the written and the lab, really two mutually exclusive entities? I realize the written is needed to get to the lab, but from what I've been told about them both, the written still covers X.25, DECnet, Appletalk, etc. (i.e. OLD STUFF) and excludes topics like multicast and voice (NEW STUFF), while conversely the lab has dropped most of the stuff like X.25, IPX, AppleTalk, etc and includes stuff like multicast and voice. I don't know 100% about what's been dropped or added to the lab (or the written for that matter), but my point is simply that it seems the written isn't meant as a "preparation" for the lab because they test different things, so why base opinions about the difficulty of the lab on the difficulty (or ease) of the written or how many people have passed it? As someone else said, the extremely high failure rate of the CCIE lab should be an indication that it's plenty difficult no matter now many people pass the written. Thanks, Mike W. "Circusnuts" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Louie- I don't think we're talk'n Apple to Apples here... > > During the early CCIE exams, I was told candidates were able to use their > own notes during the test (if Pamela Forsythe is out there, she could > confirm this rumor) & can you imagine how much "easier" the lab would have > been with versions 9.0, 10.0 or even 11.0(22) IOS. I agree there's more > information available, but after having sat through a 2 week CCIE lab prep > class... I think the information just gets you in the ballpark. Things > like bad time management & poor interpretations, are big obstacles no book > can fix. I believe the exam is as hard (if not harder) than it's ever been. > > Man- this cup of coffee I'm drink'n must not be decaff :o) > Phil > > - Original Message - > From: Louie Belt > To: > Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 9:16 PM > Subject: RE: Cisco moving to a one day lab? [7:6735] > > > > When the CCIE cert first came about there were not 100+ books avilable to > > help you pass it. There were not a multitude of online labs, lab study > > guides, study groups, ... Since all of those items are now available, I > > feel the bar has been lowered. I'm for putting it back where it was. > > > > Additionally I'm studying for my second CCIE cert, I sincerely hope that > it > > is much tougher than my first. I want to ma
Re: OT: IP addresses allocator / IP Management software [7:6964]
Check out Nortel Networks' NetID. It's probably the best thing out there. --- "Riera, Alvaro (4152)" wrote: > Hi, > > Where are looking for a software to track the IP > addresses assigned in a > co-lo environment to make easier the assignment of > the IP addresses and > provisioning of new customers. Do you know about a > product to address this > situation? > > Alvaro Riera > CCIE 6826, CCNP+Voice Access+Security, CCDP [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6964&t=6964 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
