VG200 [7:44425]
Hello All Anybody know what is the maximum VICs can be installed in VG200 ? I guess only two VICs can be installed in slot 1 which contains the voice network module, but still there is another two WIC , can I swap VIC directly into one of them ? Ismail Al-shelh Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44425&t=44425 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Home CCIE Lab [7:44311]
Kris, Thanks for replying! So far, what I have in my lab is the following: 3 2611's w/T1 wics, 1 2524, 1 2501, 1 Cat5K w/12 port 10Mbps blade & Sup I w/2 FE ports, 1 7000 w/ 4 Serial & 4 Eth ports, 4 CSU/DSU's. I know I am missing equipment here, and am just trying to figure out what other types of network modules I am going to need with the equipment. Any type of help would be great! Thanks, -Orlando Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44423&t=44311 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
""Michael L. Williams"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > More inline =) > > "nrf" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > True, a blend is always better. But let me say this. Experience alone is > > usually better than certs alone. Naturally the blend is better. But if > you > > had to pick one (continued later) > > I would agree that experience alone is usually better than certs alone > but it depends on "experience in what" I've beat that horse to death > with the previous X.25/T1 example, so I'll let it lie > > > The biggest problem that lab-rats face is simple. They don't have > > experience in working in a production environment. And it gets down to > > simple work attitudes and skills. Will the guy show up on time for his > > shift (if it's shift work)? Will he freak out and break under pressure > > when the network's down and the bosses are screaming at him?If the > > routers are acting oddly, will he approach the problem methodically, or > will > > he pull a cowboy stunt like clearing all the BGP sessions? Does he have a > > personality that lets him relate to and get along with other network guys? > > With a lab-rat CCIE, these questions are all unknown, because he's never > > actually worked on a network before. > > You bring up a very good point.. work attitudes and skills This is > something I don't believe experience or certs has anything to do with so > it's not quite fair to favor the experience over the certs because > experience has nothing to do with work attitudes (good work ethic, etc) and > skills I have to part company with you here. I believe experience is indeed extremely useful as it pertains to work attitudes and skills, for 2 reasons. #1, a guy who has experience has had more chances to mature and develop proper work attitudes. Nobody is just born with proper work attitudes, it has to be learned from somewhere. If not from the parents, then from school, and if not from school, then from the job. For example, I might expect a 16-year-old kid to perhaps not have developed a good understanding of what it and is not acceptable in the workplace, even for a minimum-wage job. That pretty much described myself and all my peers when we were 16, I admit I didn't understand how the world really worked when I was that age. But as you hold down a job, over a period of time you generally you learn more about what it takes to be a good worker. You learn just how important it is to show up on time, present an acceptable personal appearance, get along with your coworkers, etc. etc. The same thing holds true for the networking field - being within an actual datacenter for the first few times may be overwhelming and the first few times you may make silly mistakes - for example, when some new guy brought in a cup of coffee and then put it on top of a server, which is a no-no (because he then spilled it and we had lots of fun watching smoke come out of the server). But as you do it for awhile, you learn the little things that allow you to do your job more productively and more importantly avoid stupid mistakes. You learn what is and is not acceptable behavior. And secondly, experience is important as a benchmark for acceptable work habits. Like I said, let's say a guy had unacceptable work habits. Let's say he was always chronically late for work. Or he showed up to work drunk. Or he had an obnoxious personality and everybody hated him. Or he liked to surf porn in front of women coworkers. Or he was a racist. Or something like that. If this is the case, then it is unlikely that the guy would be able to present a resume full of years of solid experience, because it is likely that he would have been fired before he had a chance to build up any significant experience, and certainly he probably would not be able to provide good references who are willing to validate his experience.So if a guy can show a demonstrable and verifiable amount of solid experience, then it is likely that he indeed has acceptable work habits, because if he didn't, then why exactly did those other companies keep him on? Now, like I said, this rule is not absolute, clearly there are exceptions. But in general it is true that if a guy has lots of experience, then it is quite likely that his work habits are acceptable. You simply can't say that with the "L" word guy. An "L" guy has demonstrated that he could show up on time for 2 appointments ( the written and the lab), and that his personality wasn't so obnoxious that he didn't completely piss off the proctor. But other than that, you really can't say much of anything. He might be a complete as*hole to his coworkers. He might have a problem showing up on time. He might make racist statements at work. Etc. etc. Now you might say that this could be the case with the experienced guy too, but what I'm saying is that it is much less likely (be
Re: CCIE Number [7:44294]
1024 is definitely a kilobyte. maybe the correct story is that the Lab will killya, and it bites. ""Michael L. Williams"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I've heard this before, and I do believe that the first CCIE# given out was > 1025. but I also have to believe that part about 1024 being chosen > because of the "kill ya (Kilo)" and "hurts (hertz)" is nonsense I say > that because in the non-binary world Kilo = 1000 not 1024. and > since Hertz has been around much longer than bits and bytes, I seriously > doubt any scientist considers 1 KiloHertz to equal 1024 Hertz. =) > > Mike W. > > "Kunal Bhatia" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > Here's an interesting little tidbit I picked off of www.ccbootcamp.com - > > > > All successful students receive a CCIE number. The first CCIE was issued > > number #1025. Number #1024 was given to the CCIE Lab. They chose #1024 > > because 1024 is a kilohertz - "The Lab will kill ya (Kilo), and it hurts > > (hertz)." Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44422&t=44294 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TCP-Keepalive [7:44421]
Hi! The default time and number of tries for tcp-keepalive configured through the "service tcp-keepalive in" command is four tries of 60 seconds. Does anyone know a way of changing these parameters?? I would like to have an inactive tcp connection broken in 30 seconds, instead of in 4 minutes!! Thanks in advance! Ednilson Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44421&t=44421 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Network Design... Hmmm [7:44417]
And what's really interesting, is that in the Cisco Internet Design book, it says to start at the Core layer and work downwards... Personally, I'm going with Priscilla! (It's a girl thing...) -- Leigh Anne > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Steve Watson > Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 6:50 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Network Design... Hmmm [7:44417] > > > I am reading Priscilla's book "Top Down Network Design" for the second > time for a refresher and decided to hit the pool after I got home. On > the way out I looked on my book shelf and saw "Advanced IP Network > Design" that I haven't had a chance to look at yet. So I took it to the > pool with me. When lo and behold, what did I read on page 5, "The best > place to start when designing a network is at the bottom". > > > > Food for thought :-) > > > > Steve Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44419&t=44417 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
More inline =) "nrf" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > True, a blend is always better. But let me say this. Experience alone is > usually better than certs alone. Naturally the blend is better. But if you > had to pick one (continued later) I would agree that experience alone is usually better than certs alone but it depends on "experience in what" I've beat that horse to death with the previous X.25/T1 example, so I'll let it lie > The biggest problem that lab-rats face is simple. They don't have > experience in working in a production environment. And it gets down to > simple work attitudes and skills. Will the guy show up on time for his > shift (if it's shift work)? Will he freak out and break under pressure > when the network's down and the bosses are screaming at him?If the > routers are acting oddly, will he approach the problem methodically, or will > he pull a cowboy stunt like clearing all the BGP sessions? Does he have a > personality that lets him relate to and get along with other network guys? > With a lab-rat CCIE, these questions are all unknown, because he's never > actually worked on a network before. You bring up a very good point.. work attitudes and skills This is something I don't believe experience or certs has anything to do with so it's not quite fair to favor the experience over the certs because experience has nothing to do with work attitudes (good work ethic, etc) and skills (Yet another anecdote) I used to do PC support and then later server admin work.. although my experience in networking was not much (I knew what routers, switches, and hubs were, and understood IP and subnetting, but by no means had any hands-on with Cisco network gear), I had a solid record of having good work habits, being good at troubleshooting, using logic, learning new things, and being able to multitask... My CCNA, CCNP, etc aren't meant to show an employer that I'm reliable. They're meant to show a level of knowledge My resume and past work history (and letters of recommendations, references, etc) are meant to vouch for my reliability. Now, the gentleman I spoke of earlier that is the lead engineer in my group, has years of experience and is very good with Cisco gear. but he is the *first* one to "pull a cowboy stunt" in an attempt to get things working... (he smoked 2 - 6500Sup2s trying to convert from Hybrid to Native because he *refused* to (even made fun of me for) following the steps from Cisco's website). As an aside it's funny you used the phrase 'cowboy' because that's the exact phrase I used when trying to explain him to my other network friends.. also used the phrase "shoot from the hip".. =) So to recap my point here, to favor experience over certs because of 'work ethic and skills' is a demonstration in faulty logic because one should consider ones work ethic and skills aside from experience or certs. i.e. Experience and certs are ways to quantize ones knowledge. Work ethic and skills are a way to judge one's ability to be a good worker.. They're (IMHO) mutually exclusive. > And more to the point, I wouldn't have hired him because I have personally > had bad experiences with lab-rats. One guy just sat around and played > Solitaire all-day and while still demanding a high salary. Another 2 > completely screwed up a bunch of 6500's and 4000's that we had (remember, > those switches are not part of the exam). I understand your bad experiences It sounds to me like your blaming the cert for lack of being able to choose qualified employees (not meant to piss you off, but you cannot even begin to blame the cert for Mr. Solitaire being a lazy sack no more than I can blame a college for a lazy graduate I mean he sat around playing Solitaire and demanded a high salary who was the fool that agreed to pay or or didn't fire his ass?) As far as the labrats toasting a couple of switches, as I pointed out above, where I work Mr. Cowboy lead engineer, with tons of experience, fried two Sup2s because he didn't wanna follow directions. so again, blaming the cert (IMHO) isn't valid because I could turn that around and blame experience for the same thing. (i.e. "well, he's got years of experience... he should've *known* better") (I mean, I was a 'virtually experienceless' CCNP, but I've never toasted a switch, router, etc because I'm NOT A BOOB!!! I know how to READ DIRECTIONS) (not shouting at you, just adding emphasis) (you like my multi-parenthesis statements..?. hehe) (it's like they'll never stop.) (ever) LOL > So I agree with you that some > lab-rats are obviously good. But on the other hand, there are enough bad > ones out there that it makes me wary to hire one. Again I think you could make the case (even moreso) for experienced people.. "There are enough bad people out there that it makes me wary to hire one" > And surely you would
Network Design... Hmmm [7:44417]
I am reading Priscilla's book "Top Down Network Design" for the second time for a refresher and decided to hit the pool after I got home. On the way out I looked on my book shelf and saw "Advanced IP Network Design" that I haven't had a chance to look at yet. So I took it to the pool with me. When lo and behold, what did I read on page 5, "The best place to start when designing a network is at the bottom". Food for thought :-) Steve Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44417&t=44417 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
Ok, inline ""Michael L. Williams"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Comments inline.. > > "Tom Monte" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I think alot of us don't have a choice. If you don't have a job that > > provides alot of Cisco experience, you probably have a hard time finding > one > > that does. I don't see why I should be looked down on for that. > > I have to agree with Tom here.. nrf, you put too much value on > 'experience', period. I'm not one to argue that certs are better than > experience, but as my previous posts said, both certs and experience add > different components to ones knowledge and skills, and to claim that one is > better than the other has no merit. (here's a lighter view) A network > engineer is like a good peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Could you eat and > enjoy a peanut butter sandwich? Sure... Could you eat and enjoy a jelly > sandwich? Sure. But a good PB&J has just the right mixture of > both.. > > Certs alone are not better than experience. > > Experience alone is not (always) better than certs. True, a blend is always better. But let me say this. Experience alone is usually better than certs alone. Naturally the blend is better. But if you had to pick one (continued later) > > If I'm running a network running OSPF and using ATM and VoIP, I'd much > rather hire a CCIE labrat over someone with years of experience on a network > running X.25 over T1 lines You say Dial-Peer, ASBR Virtual Link, or > VPI/VCI to the X.25/T1 person and they go "huh? I don't understand what > you're talking about, but I've got years of experience". At least you > know the labrat has done the configuration of said things, enough to pass a > proctored lab exam What has the person with experience got to prove > (s)he can configure these things? Nothing. The biggest problem that lab-rats face is simple. They don't have experience in working in a production environment. And it gets down to simple work attitudes and skills. Will the guy show up on time for his shift (if it's shift work)? Will he freak out and break under pressure when the network's down and the bosses are screaming at him?If the routers are acting oddly, will he approach the problem methodically, or will he pull a cowboy stunt like clearing all the BGP sessions? Does he have a personality that lets him relate to and get along with other network guys? With a lab-rat CCIE, these questions are all unknown, because he's never actually worked on a network before. My point is, far more important than whatever technical skills a person may have, is whether the guy is reliable while working on a network. As far as the guy with experience, at least I have some assurance, because if he really sucked, he probably would have been fired before he had the chance to accumulate the experience. Now obviously this isn't perfect (like I said, there is no perfect indicator), but it's still a useful indication, or at least, a whole lot more useful than a cert. With a cert, I know the guy can pass a test, but how do I know what he's going to do on a network? Is he going to do 'clear ip bgp *'? That's my point. > > Personally, I realize the value of both experience (don't debug EIGRP on > your busiest core router during an EIGRP storm without 'no logging console') > and certs. > > Remember, everything is relative.. If someone who is a CCIE with little > experience is interviewing for a job somewhere that the top network people > couldn't get through any of the CCNP exams, then perhaps they should demand > a higher salary. who's to say they shouldn't? If that same CCIE is > interviewing for a job at a place that has 3 CCIEs (or good experienced > people) on staff and they expect much more from them, then perhaps that CCIE > should take the lower salary and see this as a great opportunity to learn > from other seasoned network professionals. I'm sorry, but I've worked > many places where the network people were goons that though RIP was the best > thing since sliced bread. I'd hire a labrat CCIE over them anyday. > besides, I've seen labrat CCIEs that have gotten their first network job and > done great things. one friend of mine was a labrat CCIE (for the most > part), and walked into a very well known top financial firm (the > headquarters) and all of the 'experienced' engineers there (up to the very > top of the network engineering ladder) stood by and watched him virtually > single handedly setup and configure their VoIP, their Hoot-n-Hollar system, > ALL of their Multicast IP routing architechtures (involving some very > complex situations with passing routes thru PIX, NATs, etc) and their IPTV > system. You wouldn't have hired him because he didn't have "experience" and > you would have been passing up possibly (IMHO) one of the best examples of a > top network engineer there
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
Hold on. Inline ""Tom Monte"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I think most of our disagreement is over semantics. There is one thing you > said that took me a minute to figure out, but here is my hypothesis. > > "there are guys who are passing the lab without any experience (which is not > necesarily a problem, but when they start demanding outlandish salaries, > then that is a problem)." > > I think this boils down to an example of capitalism. We have an experienced > CCIE called nrf and a "labrat" CCIE called labrat1. > > Labrat1 tells people that interview him he wants 200,000, because he passed > his CCIE. The employers all turn him down. Labrat1 has unrealistic > expectations and there is enough of a supply the employers can wait or find > someone else. Poor labrat1 can go back to crimping cable and getting coffee > for nrf or accept there offer for a mere 80,000. Why is this a problem for > you? I didn't really understand it until I realized what happens when the > supply of labrats goes down. > > Nrf convinces Cisco to make the tests more difficult so poor labrat1 can't > pass and there are 3,000 CCIEs in the world instead of 10,000. Nrf goes to > get a job and says I want 200,000. The company hires him, because poor > labrat1 is crimping cable. Nrf makes more money when labrat1 can't pass the > exam. So basically you are accusing me of trying to protect my turf. Which is why to be fair, I've always been an advocate of invalidating everybody's certs, including mine (presuming that I am a CCIE, which I refuse to disclose for reasons stated previously), and have everybody retest on a much tougher test that measures practical skills more closely than the current test. If the lab-rats can't pass this newer test, too bad for them. If I can't pass this new test, then too bad for me (again, assuming I'm a current CCIE). If the old-timer CCIE's have left their skills slip and can't pass, then too bad for them. So now you can no longer accuse me of protecting my turf because I'm advocating a plan that's fair for everybody. Of course, this plan obviously has a huge flaw in that there is no incentive for Cisco to do it, so obviously they won't. Which is why I also advocate another idea where Cisco doesn't invalidate everybody's current exams, but instead comes up with an additional super-ridiculously-hard (but still practical) test that is above and beyond the current CCIE, and where you must be a CCIE to be eligible to attempt it. This would ultimately create a prestige class of super-engineers that would ultimately supplant what the CCIE is today. Whoever passes, well, more power to them, whether it's me, the lab-rat, the old-timers, or anybody else. So now you can say that it's all fair and I'm not protecting my turf at all. > > If this isn't true then why do you care if labrat1 gets a job or not? How > does that affect you? It absolutely affects me because it affects the good-name of the program. Again, assuming that I am a CCIE, then I should be concerned that others who aren't very good engineers at all will associate themselves with that name, thereby smearing my name in the process. For example, consider a case of a guy who isn't a criminal but chooses to associate with known criminals. When people see the company he keeps, many will assume that the guy is a criminal himself. It's guilt by association. Is it right, is it fair? No, of course not. But life's not fair, and we both know that this is what people do. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not calling 'L's criminals. That's just an example I was using. But I think you see my point. Whenever possible, you want to associate yourself as much as possible with strong positive examples, not negative ones. > > "Whether you want to call them the 'L' word or whatever you want to call it, > it doesn't matter, it's just words. If you think the 'L' word is pejorative > and you want to call them something else, fine. So using or not using the > 'L' word in not going to change the fact that people really are passing the > lab without experience." > > I think alot of us don't have a choice. If you don't have a job that > provides alot of Cisco experience, you probably have a hard time finding one > that does. I don't see why I should be looked down on for that. It's not a case of people looking down on others. But I believe it's also people's responsibility to be proactive. You can't just wait around for opportunities to come about, sometimes you have to actively create such opportunities. For every one person that complains that he's being given only limited opportunities, there is another person who could take those limited opportunities and find a way to succeed. Again, I have to point to, say, German, Jewish, Scottish, or Asian immigrants to the United States who often arrived penniless and invariably experienced massive language problems as well as overt racism (especially Jews and
Re: Cisco IOS Training [7:44411]
I'm not a real Cisco programmer, nor I am really much of a programmer at all. I would like to hear real answers, but here is where I would start, if I were you... Here is ground zero: The C Programming Language, 2nd Edition; ISBN 0131103628 The Standard C Library; ISBN 0131315099 Applying RCS and SCCS; ISBN 1565921178 But you'll also need some of this stuff: Interconnection Networks: An Engineering Approach Inside Cisco IOS Software Architecture TCP/IP Illustrated Volume II OSPF Complete Implementation The Design and Implementation of the 4.4BSD Operating System TCP/IP and Linux Protocol Implementation 4.4 BSD Programmer's Supplementary Documents Applied Cryptography Introduction to Algorithms, Second Edition The Art of Computer Programming, Volumes 1-3 Boxed Set Algorithms in C, Parts 1-5 (list could become exhaustive). Except this to take about 5-10 years to learn and only if you already have a Masters/Ph.D in Computer Science. If you already have the C programming knowledge, just start going to IETF, IEEE Comsoc/ Networking, and ACM meetings and reading all their publications that have to do with various Internetworking concepts that interest you. -dre ""Mark Godfrey"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Does anybody know of any good books on how to write IOS code? Say a person > wants to go to work for Cisco and help build new trains of code were would > he/she start? Or better yet how would you go about editing IOS code. > > Respectfully, > > Mark Godfrey > Network Engineer > Road Runner High Speed Online Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44414&t=44411 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
Comments inline.. "Tom Monte" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I think alot of us don't have a choice. If you don't have a job that > provides alot of Cisco experience, you probably have a hard time finding one > that does. I don't see why I should be looked down on for that. I have to agree with Tom here.. nrf, you put too much value on 'experience', period. I'm not one to argue that certs are better than experience, but as my previous posts said, both certs and experience add different components to ones knowledge and skills, and to claim that one is better than the other has no merit. (here's a lighter view) A network engineer is like a good peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Could you eat and enjoy a peanut butter sandwich? Sure... Could you eat and enjoy a jelly sandwich? Sure. But a good PB&J has just the right mixture of both.. Certs alone are not better than experience. Experience alone is not (always) better than certs. If I'm running a network running OSPF and using ATM and VoIP, I'd much rather hire a CCIE labrat over someone with years of experience on a network running X.25 over T1 lines You say Dial-Peer, ASBR Virtual Link, or VPI/VCI to the X.25/T1 person and they go "huh? I don't understand what you're talking about, but I've got years of experience". At least you know the labrat has done the configuration of said things, enough to pass a proctored lab exam What has the person with experience got to prove (s)he can configure these things? Nothing. Personally, I realize the value of both experience (don't debug EIGRP on your busiest core router during an EIGRP storm without 'no logging console') and certs. Remember, everything is relative.. If someone who is a CCIE with little experience is interviewing for a job somewhere that the top network people couldn't get through any of the CCNP exams, then perhaps they should demand a higher salary. who's to say they shouldn't? If that same CCIE is interviewing for a job at a place that has 3 CCIEs (or good experienced people) on staff and they expect much more from them, then perhaps that CCIE should take the lower salary and see this as a great opportunity to learn from other seasoned network professionals. I'm sorry, but I've worked many places where the network people were goons that though RIP was the best thing since sliced bread. I'd hire a labrat CCIE over them anyday. besides, I've seen labrat CCIEs that have gotten their first network job and done great things. one friend of mine was a labrat CCIE (for the most part), and walked into a very well known top financial firm (the headquarters) and all of the 'experienced' engineers there (up to the very top of the network engineering ladder) stood by and watched him virtually single handedly setup and configure their VoIP, their Hoot-n-Hollar system, ALL of their Multicast IP routing architechtures (involving some very complex situations with passing routes thru PIX, NATs, etc) and their IPTV system. You wouldn't have hired him because he didn't have "experience" and you would have been passing up possibly (IMHO) one of the best examples of a top network engineer there is Don't forget. people with certs and little experience can do great things. Depends on the person. not always the certs. not always the experience Mike W. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44413&t=44342 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
OK, inline ""Michael Williams"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Comments inline... > > nrf wrote: > > What I said is that not that I hate all 'lab-rat' CCIE's > > because everybody > > has to start somewhere.Rather that I find the phenomena that > > people view > > the CCIE as an easy shortcut highly suspect. This phenomena > > manifests > > itself in guys obtaining their cert and then immediately > > demanding a level > > of salary and respect equal to another guy who has > > significantly more > > experience. > > A couple of comments here. First, given that the CCIE is quite difficult to > obtain, I think that one who has achieved it deserves a certain minumum > amount of respect whether they have 'real world' experience or not, and the > fact that you (often) use the word 'labrat' to stereotype them denies them > even that minimum level of respect. I never said that anybody, even a lab-rat, deserves zero respect. I've never said that. What I'm saying is that he most likely deserves less respect than a non-lab-rat. That's not to say that he can't earn more respect by continuing to build on his knowledge. But at that point in his career, I think I'm on very safe ground when I say that such a guy doesn't deserve the level of respect as the average CCIE (which would naturally include all those experienced and highly knowledgeable guys) >I'm not saying any CCIE (or anyone for > that matter) should demand a level of respect which they are not due, but > they also (regardless of how obtained) should never be denied that level of > respect they've earned, especially from fellow networkers. Hey, if you've earned respect that is due, then there's no problem. The problem is not with those guys but, as you said, with guys who think they deserve more respect than they are actually due. So we are in full agreement here. > > Second, IMHO, you are making a grave mistake in assuming that experience > always teaches one the lessons of networking any more than a certification. > Experience can teach things certs dont. But certs can educate someone about > things they've never done before they ever have to call upon that knowledge, > and one type of knowledge is no less valuable than the other. I've never said that certs are not useful. Indeed they can be. Again, it's a case that some people think they are more useful than they actually are. >There are > many lessons that someone needs to learn in the school of hard knocks to > really understand because the certification doesn't deal with such issues. > However, a very wise man once told me, "Sometimes 5 years experience isn't 5 > years experience. Many times it's the same 1 year of experience 5 times > over". On the other hand, surely you would agree that sometimes 5 years experience is actually 15 years experience, if you catch my drift. Really really good experience is immensely valuable, just like really bad experience is practically worthless. So if you want to make the point that certain kinds of experience aren't very useful, you must concede that other kinds of experience are exceptionally useful. So basically, it's a wash. When you examine a guy with 5 years experience, he might actually only "have" 1 year of real experience. But on the other hand, he might actually "have" 15 years of experience. So saying that 5 years = 5 years is probably a good average number to use. >Think about that. I'll give an excellent example that shows this > point (which I've given before, but I think it's needed to support my > position). I worked with a gentleman at a previous job when I was 3 months > into my first 6 months of real hands-on networking experience. This > gentleman who had been dealing with Cisco and networking for 5+ years. I > had just completed CCNP. He did a sniffer trace and was surprised when he > saw multicast traffic and said outloud to all of his fellow "experienced" > engineers "Where's this multicast traffic coming from?" I, the lowly > inexperienced CCNP, asked "Aren't we using EIGRP" (which we were). He said > "Yeah, but what's that got to do with this multicast traffic". I just > turned and walked away. I was floored that a room full of engineers with a > combined 50+ years of experience couldn't answer this, when ANYONE who has > made it through the CCNP Routing exam would have answered the question in a > heartbeat. Experience limits you to what you deal with. Certification > encourages you (and requires you) to read and learn new things that you may > never use just to be exposed to them. Again, I agree that experience is not a perfect indicator for employee success. But I believe that it is a better indicator than anything else out there. It is certainly a better indicator than the number of certs a guy holds. The job market agrees with me - you've probably noticed how companies are demanding experience first, and certs second. Not because experience is the perfect in
Re: Security Books [7:44347]
Don't bother with the CSISS book, it is rehash from the other books. The first four you mentioned are all you need to pass the CSS1 tests - it's all I used (and hands-on, of course). In my opinion the CSS1 tests are pretty simple, all of the questions are straight out of the four coursebooks. As far as the Security written, dunno. I heard reading all of the RFCs is pretty entertaining... My $0.02, John Dorffler CCIE #6677 ""Brian Zeitz"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I have most of the Cisco security books now. MCNS, PIX, VPN, CIDS etc. > etc., > the one book I don't have is "Cisco Secure Internet Security Solutions". > Looking though the table of contents, it looks like some of the same > stuff > from the books I already have. Do you think this book is worth getting > if I > already have these other security books? This is listed for the reading > list > for CCIE Security as well. > > Also I don't see any books for CCIE Security in particular, would it be > possible for Cisco to make a library for people perusing this track? Or > maybe the books I have for CCNP & CSS1 are some of the same books needed > for > CCIE Security. Any suggestions for a book list for someone who would be > attempting a CCIE security written exam? Of course I am also have/doing > hands on stuff, and lab work. I know there are some guides from > CCbootcamp, > i guess that is what most people are using. > > I was also looking at the "Open Cable" book, not that I am working on > that, > just thought it would be neat to learn some things about the TV/Cable > industry in my spare time J > > > > Brian Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44402&t=44347 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CCIE Number [7:44294]
I've heard this before, and I do believe that the first CCIE# given out was 1025. but I also have to believe that part about 1024 being chosen because of the "kill ya (Kilo)" and "hurts (hertz)" is nonsense I say that because in the non-binary world Kilo = 1000 not 1024. and since Hertz has been around much longer than bits and bytes, I seriously doubt any scientist considers 1 KiloHertz to equal 1024 Hertz. =) Mike W. "Kunal Bhatia" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Here's an interesting little tidbit I picked off of www.ccbootcamp.com - > > All successful students receive a CCIE number. The first CCIE was issued > number #1025. Number #1024 was given to the CCIE Lab. They chose #1024 > because 1024 is a kilohertz - "The Lab will kill ya (Kilo), and it hurts > (hertz)." Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44410&t=44294 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Router boot process [7:44288]
Could you please give me the cisco web link about this diagram?. I did a lot of search, but can not find it. Many thanks. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44412&t=44288 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cisco IOS Training [7:44411]
Does anybody know of any good books on how to write IOS code? Say a person wants to go to work for Cisco and help build new trains of code were would he/she start? Or better yet how would you go about editing IOS code. Respectfully, Mark Godfrey Network Engineer Road Runner High Speed Online Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44411&t=44411 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: why my gigabit switch port speed only hit 10M? [7:44333]
I saw something the same with my CAT 5505's you need to set the ports to 100 full do not use the auto command. Hope this helps. MG ""Michael L. Williams"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > You must have some dog slow hard drives... Be sure to keep you Mb and > your MB straight when speaking of hard drive speeds I have an "older" > (a couple of years old) Western Digital 7200RPM 30GB drive that I record and > edit video on, and it gets around 26MBytes/sec throughput on read and around > 24Mbytes/sec on writes. Virtually all modern IDE drive can easily top > 100Mbps (12.5MBytes/sec) any good drive made in the last couple of > years (7200RPM) can usually read and write (sustained throughput) up to and > over 25 to 30Mbytes/sec (200-240Mbps or more). And this is just a > single drive if you have a server with RAID5 kicking, you could > theoretically fully utilize 1Gbps, however, the bus in the PC (sever) > usually become the bottleneck at that point (even the 64-bit PCI bus that > most high end servers (even running at 66MHz) can only handle 512Mbps of > throughput, so getting a full 1Gbps throughput from a PC is basically out of > the question AFAIK). > > Mike W. > > "Rick" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > Make sure your PC's are capable of transferring data faster > > than this. There is not many hard drives that can do 100mb/s. > > My laptop I am on now tops out at about 8.5mb but my PC > > goes up to about 17mb. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44409&t=44333 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
STP and 7 hops [7:44408]
Is the 7 hop limit in STP the diameter of the network (ie. end-to-end) or 7 hops form root bridge? Anyone know historically why it was 7? -- RFC 1149 Compliant. Get in my head: http://sar.dynu.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44408&t=44408 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Test - delete [7:44407]
haven't received a thing from the list in 2 days. Getting all my other lists just fine.. Kevin Wigle Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44407&t=44407 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: How to get internal dns w/MS vpn clients and 3005? [7:44406]
Yep. We had this issue with using PPTP as the VPN supplied DNS/WINS are appended to the end of the list. You can block DNS queries outbound from The concentrator through your FW ( which is a good Idea anyways ) that way the first 2 queries time out, and it is forced to use yours internally. Be careful of users that have a 3COM DSL/Cable FW. I have run into issues where it acts a proxy, so the clients will still be able to reach them, and they will relay the requests. Unfortunately, only remote traffic is sent over the VPN link. Local traffic is still sent our the Ethernet if it is present. You can also switch to the Cisco Secure VPN Client 3.5x which will in fact "rip out" the old DNS/WINS entry and replace them with the concentrator supplied ones. I would recommend this approach as the performance gains are tremendous! Thanks Larry -Original Message- From: BH [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 2:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: How to get internal dns w/MS vpn clients and 3005? [7:44401] Hi, I am using Cisco VPN3005 appliance for secured access with MS-Windows clients and cannot get dhcp supplied dns to overide any pre-existing dns server entries ( for instance, dns servers dynamically provided by a dsl provider). DHCP servers for base group client connections are set, tunnel-type is remote access and internal dns servers are configured to be used by all vpn clients. Anyone seen this before? Thanks! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44406&t=44406 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
I think most of our disagreement is over semantics. There is one thing you said that took me a minute to figure out, but here is my hypothesis. "there are guys who are passing the lab without any experience (which is not necesarily a problem, but when they start demanding outlandish salaries, then that is a problem)." I think this boils down to an example of capitalism. We have an experienced CCIE called nrf and a "labrat" CCIE called labrat1. Labrat1 tells people that interview him he wants 200,000, because he passed his CCIE. The employers all turn him down. Labrat1 has unrealistic expectations and there is enough of a supply the employers can wait or find someone else. Poor labrat1 can go back to crimping cable and getting coffee for nrf or accept there offer for a mere 80,000. Why is this a problem for you? I didn't really understand it until I realized what happens when the supply of labrats goes down. Nrf convinces Cisco to make the tests more difficult so poor labrat1 can't pass and there are 3,000 CCIEs in the world instead of 10,000. Nrf goes to get a job and says I want 200,000. The company hires him, because poor labrat1 is crimping cable. Nrf makes more money when labrat1 can't pass the exam. If this isn't true then why do you care if labrat1 gets a job or not? How does that affect you? "Whether you want to call them the 'L' word or whatever you want to call it, it doesn't matter, it's just words. If you think the 'L' word is pejorative and you want to call them something else, fine. So using or not using the 'L' word in not going to change the fact that people really are passing the lab without experience." I think alot of us don't have a choice. If you don't have a job that provides alot of Cisco experience, you probably have a hard time finding one that does. I don't see why I should be looked down on for that. -Original Message- From: nrf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 3:10 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342] ""Tom Monte"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Myth or Fact > Unless your post includes a statistcal sampling of people who employ CCIEs, > I am afraid it isn't a fact. I don't like to speak on behalf of the rest of > the world so I chose the word myth, maybe generalization would have been a > better choice. My post was directed at all posts that use the words "real" > CCIE, not just yours. > > Point #1 > I agree a new CCIE should make less and it is silly to complain about it, > but then that wasn't my point and this wasn't directed entirely at you. I > object to lumping people into the categories "lab-rat" and calling the CCIE > a "piece of paper." There are alot of people on this list working hard and > sincerely to obtain there CCIE. I'm not out to denigrate people's efforts. What I'm saying is that people need to put the CCIE in perspective. It is not an end-goal in itself but a single step (albeit a fairly substantial step) in what is a long chain of goals necessary for a successful network engineer. People who are studying hard should continue to do so, but also be realistic about what the cert can and cannot do for them. > > Point #2 > Again, my post was not entirely directed at you, but the general perception > that the CCIE is so easy anyone can do it. I am sure the difficulty will > still discourage most people from pursuing the CCIE, even if your posts > don't. :O I have never lumped the words 'easy' and 'CCIE' together. I may have lumped the words 'easier' (but not the word 'easy') and 'CCIE' together in regards to the one-day-lab change, but as you can see, I have actually stated that the one-day-lab is probably not easier. And if my posts encourage or discourage people to do something, than so be it. I believe people are best served by getting complete information on what is going on. The fact is, there are guys who are passing the lab without any experience (which is not necesarily a problem, but when they start demanding outlandish salaries, then that is a problem). Whether you want to call them the 'L' word or whatever you want to call it, it doesn't matter, it's just words. If you think the 'L' word is pejorative and you want to call them something else, fine. So using or not using the 'L' word in not going to change the fact that people really are passing the lab without experience. That's the truth, and if that encourages more people to try the lab, then so be it. What it might also do is convince Cisco to make changes to the program. > > Point #3 > I am sure we are all happy you are in the "clever lucky not a paper CCIE" > group. My point was be thankful for what you have, because there are alot > of people who would like to be CCIEs. Without answering the question of whether I'm a CCIE or not (for reasons I stated in a previous post), let me say this. Those people who occupy high-level networking positions should be
Re: help required in configuring frame relay traffic shaping [7:44404]
I have been most successful in traffic-shaping when I apply it in the following way. Configure frame relay traffic-shapping on the main interface This by default will configure all sub-interfaces to shape at a rate of 56K. Create you map class and add the following. Configure your CIR (In Cisco Terms this would be your 32K) Configure your MINCIR(In Cisco Terms this is your 16K) Configure your Bc value (If equal to or less that 640K best rule is 1/8th of CIR) In this case your Bc value would be 4K. Cisco recommends you use the 1/8th rule. However, your Bc value should never be greater than 80K. Apply your Map Class to the sub interface. This should work! Good Luck! Eric Lange USBank Network Engineering "Steven A. Ridder" To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: help required in configuring frame relay traffic shaping Sent by: [7:44397] nobody@groups tudy.com 05/17/2002 02:24 PM Please respond to "Steven A. Ridder" ""Khurrum Shahzad"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hello > Can anybody tell me any mistake or missing configuration for frame relay > traffc shaping? > I connected two cisco 2600 router serial interfaces throug 32 k link. I > configured point to point frame relay subinterface on both interfaces. I > want to use this link on CIR 16k and peak rate 32k. > > My configuration is > > On interface > >frame-ralay traffic shaping > > and on subinterface > >frame-relay class cisco > > and for map-class > > map-class frame-relay cisco > frame-ralay traffic-rate 16000 32000 > frame-relay adaptive-shaping becn > > > and I also tried > > map-class frame-relay cisco > frame-ralay cir 16000 > frame-relay bc 2000 > frame-relay be 2000 > frame-relay adaptive-shaping becn > > > Problem is that when I run data on line e.g. file transfer, bandwidth uses > always 16k or less although no other data run on ckt and total > available bandwidth is 32 k. The data rate does not reach to peak rate and > if I remove traffic shaping then total 32 k used. Is any missing parameter > or command in above configuration? > > regards > > Khurrum > > > -- > ___ > Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com > http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44404&t=44404 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: HELP pls ,,,, IPX ROUTING AND VOVELL 3.12 [7:44338]
Hi Chris 1.thanks for your answer , I found everything at Priscilla and others who sent me private replay 2.I know technology, But I didn`t have time for test or try and error , 99% of my projects are related to IP 3.Seems you don`t know Business ;) = (Nothing is impossible) Regards > Just turn on IPX routing and IPX RIP and everything will work itself out :) > (Boy, I'm glad I'm not you. How'd you get roped into a project without > knowledge of the technology and without the time to learn?) Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44403&t=44338 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to get internal dns w/ MS vpn clients and 3005 [7:44400]
Hi, I am using Cisco VPN3005 appliance for secured access with MS-Windows clients and cannot get dhcp supplied dns to overide any pre-existing dns server entries ( for instance, dns servers dynamically provided by a dsl provider). DHCP servers for base group client connections are set, tunnel-type is remote access and internal dns servers are configured to be used by all vpn clients. Anyone seen this before? Thanks! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44400&t=44400 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How to get internal dns w/MS vpn clients and 3005? [7:44401]
Hi, I am using Cisco VPN3005 appliance for secured access with MS-Windows clients and cannot get dhcp supplied dns to overide any pre-existing dns server entries ( for instance, dns servers dynamically provided by a dsl provider). DHCP servers for base group client connections are set, tunnel-type is remote access and internal dns servers are configured to be used by all vpn clients. Anyone seen this before? Thanks! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44401&t=44401 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: how to limit bandwidth [7:44335]
I think a better way is to use traffic-policing/CAR. ""Stefan Razeshu"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > try to look > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ c/qcprt2/qcdcq.htm#73920 > and also at > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ c/qcprt2/qcdconmg.htm#20680 > > you can implement this using custom queue > > Have fun > Stefan Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44399&t=44335 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: help required in configuring frame relay traffic shaping [7:44397]
""Khurrum Shahzad"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hello > Can anybody tell me any mistake or missing configuration for frame relay > traffc shaping? > I connected two cisco 2600 router serial interfaces throug 32 k link. I > configured point to point frame relay subinterface on both interfaces. I > want to use this link on CIR 16k and peak rate 32k. > > My configuration is > > On interface > >frame-ralay traffic shaping > > and on subinterface > >frame-relay class cisco > > and for map-class > > map-class frame-relay cisco > frame-ralay traffic-rate 16000 32000 > frame-relay adaptive-shaping becn > > > and I also tried > > map-class frame-relay cisco > frame-ralay cir 16000 > frame-relay bc 2000 > frame-relay be 2000 > frame-relay adaptive-shaping becn > > > Problem is that when I run data on line e.g. file transfer, bandwidth uses > always 16k or less although no other data run on ckt and total > available bandwidth is 32 k. The data rate does not reach to peak rate and > if I remove traffic shaping then total 32 k used. Is any missing parameter > or command in above configuration? > > regards > > Khurrum > > > -- > ___ > Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com > http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44397&t=44397 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
""Tom Monte"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Myth or Fact > Unless your post includes a statistcal sampling of people who employ CCIEs, > I am afraid it isn't a fact. I don't like to speak on behalf of the rest of > the world so I chose the word myth, maybe generalization would have been a > better choice. My post was directed at all posts that use the words "real" > CCIE, not just yours. > > Point #1 > I agree a new CCIE should make less and it is silly to complain about it, > but then that wasn't my point and this wasn't directed entirely at you. I > object to lumping people into the categories "lab-rat" and calling the CCIE > a "piece of paper." There are alot of people on this list working hard and > sincerely to obtain there CCIE. I'm not out to denigrate people's efforts. What I'm saying is that people need to put the CCIE in perspective. It is not an end-goal in itself but a single step (albeit a fairly substantial step) in what is a long chain of goals necessary for a successful network engineer. People who are studying hard should continue to do so, but also be realistic about what the cert can and cannot do for them. > > Point #2 > Again, my post was not entirely directed at you, but the general perception > that the CCIE is so easy anyone can do it. I am sure the difficulty will > still discourage most people from pursuing the CCIE, even if your posts > don't. :O I have never lumped the words 'easy' and 'CCIE' together. I may have lumped the words 'easier' (but not the word 'easy') and 'CCIE' together in regards to the one-day-lab change, but as you can see, I have actually stated that the one-day-lab is probably not easier. And if my posts encourage or discourage people to do something, than so be it. I believe people are best served by getting complete information on what is going on. The fact is, there are guys who are passing the lab without any experience (which is not necesarily a problem, but when they start demanding outlandish salaries, then that is a problem). Whether you want to call them the 'L' word or whatever you want to call it, it doesn't matter, it's just words. If you think the 'L' word is pejorative and you want to call them something else, fine. So using or not using the 'L' word in not going to change the fact that people really are passing the lab without experience. That's the truth, and if that encourages more people to try the lab, then so be it. What it might also do is convince Cisco to make changes to the program. > > Point #3 > I am sure we are all happy you are in the "clever lucky not a paper CCIE" > group. My point was be thankful for what you have, because there are alot > of people who would like to be CCIEs. Without answering the question of whether I'm a CCIE or not (for reasons I stated in a previous post), let me say this. Those people who occupy high-level networking positions should be thankful not so much for being a CCIE, but more for being given strong networking opportunities and experiences. Or actually, what I should really say is that they should be thankful for having been raised within a culture that has instilled in them a set of personal values (like a strong work ethic, a respect for skills, etc.) that allows them to take advantage of whatever opportunities have been presented to them. Like I said, success is determined not so much because a person has been presented with an exceptionally large number of good opportunities, but rather that they take advantage of whatever opportunities that do get presented to them. Luck is indeed an important component, but things like personal attitudes and a willingness to do hard work are important also. > > -Original Message- > From: nrf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 10:46 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342] > > > I have a feeling that I'm going to regret doing this. But anyway, inline. > The bottom line is that these aren't 'myths', but actual facts as to how > Cisco engineers are perceived by employers. > > > ""Tom Monte"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I want to write about all the posts that use the words "real" CCIE. I > hope > > we can beat this into the ground and never speak of it again. > > > > > > 1.) I think people should spend more time on technical issues and career > > opportunities and less on putting people into categories. "Yes, I have > less > > Cisco experience than most people on this list, oh my god crucify me now!" > > > > Lesson: Everyone starts knowing nothing. > > Look, I never said there was anything wrong with knowing less than the next > guy. The real problem is knowing less than the next guy and still demanding > the same respect and pay as that next guy simply because you have a piece of > paper, and then when you don't get that same respect and pay, then whining > incessantly about it. Again,
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
I agree with Michael! Working with Intel boxes and bay hubs, for 5 years isn't quite the same as saying 5 years with SUN systems and ATM.No matter how you pass the test, you still pass the test. That in itself eliminates 95% of the "parrots". If you still don't know what you are doing, well,, then you qualify for IT Director or maybe CIO. So either way you're set. Have a great day! Kevin McCarty CCNA CCNP Computer Sciences Corporation Defense Sector Michael Williams To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342] Sent by: nobody 05/17/2002 01:08 PM Please respond to Michael Williams Comments inline... nrf wrote: > What I said is that not that I hate all 'lab-rat' CCIE's > because everybody > has to start somewhere.Rather that I find the phenomena that > people view > the CCIE as an easy shortcut highly suspect. This phenomena > manifests > itself in guys obtaining their cert and then immediately > demanding a level > of salary and respect equal to another guy who has > significantly more > experience. A couple of comments here. First, given that the CCIE is quite difficult to obtain, I think that one who has achieved it deserves a certain minumum amount of respect whether they have 'real world' experience or not, and the fact that you (often) use the word 'labrat' to stereotype them denies them even that minimum level of respect. I'm not saying any CCIE (or anyone for that matter) should demand a level of respect which they are not due, but they also (regardless of how obtained) should never be denied that level of respect they've earned, especially from fellow networkers. Second, IMHO, you are making a grave mistake in assuming that experience always teaches one the lessons of networking any more than a certification. Experience can teach things certs dont. But certs can educate someone about things they've never done before they ever have to call upon that knowledge, and one type of knowledge is no less valuable than the other. There are many lessons that someone needs to learn in the school of hard knocks to really understand because the certification doesn't deal with such issues. However, a very wise man once told me, "Sometimes 5 years experience isn't 5 years experience. Many times it's the same 1 year of experience 5 times over". Think about that. I'll give an excellent example that shows this point (which I've given before, but I think it's needed to support my position). I worked with a gentleman at a previous job when I was 3 months into my first 6 months of real hands-on networking experience. This gentleman who had been dealing with Cisco and networking for 5+ years. I had just completed CCNP. He did a sniffer trace and was surprised when he saw multicast traffic and said outloud to all of his fellow "experienced" engineers "Where's this multicast traffic coming from?" I, the lowly inexperienced CCNP, asked "Aren't we using EIGRP" (which we were). He said "Yeah, but what's that got to do with this multicast traffic". I just turned and walked away. I was floored that a room full of engineers with a combined 50+ years of experience couldn't answer this, when ANYONE who has made it through the CCNP Routing exam would have answered the question in a heartbeat. Experience limits you to what you deal with. Certification encourages you (and requires you) to read and learn new things that you may never use just to be exposed to them. Experience is only as good as what it exposes you to. If you have 10 years experience with RIP networks and that's it, then that 10 years may just as well be 6 months. Because all that "experience" isn't going to mean squat in a shop running OSPF/BGF/EIGRP, etc... That's where having the knowledge that a certification gives you is advantageous. > Or it manifests itself in guys who don't want to > pay their dues > and do grunt-work and just want to be the senior network guy > without having > spent any time as the non-senior network guy. It is that kind > of behavior > that is what I'm targeting. Is my finding this phenomena > highly skeptical > really objectionable? I think most people here would find it > quite
help required in configuring frame relay traffic shaping [7:44394]
Hello Can anybody tell me any mistake or missing configuration for frame relay traffc shaping? I connected two cisco 2600 router serial interfaces throug 32 k link. I configured point to point frame relay subinterface on both interfaces. I want to use this link on CIR 16k and peak rate 32k. My configuration is On interface frame-ralay traffic shaping and on subinterface frame-relay class cisco and for map-class map-class frame-relay cisco frame-ralay traffic-rate 16000 32000 frame-relay adaptive-shaping becn and I also tried map-class frame-relay cisco frame-ralay cir 16000 frame-relay bc 2000 frame-relay be 2000 frame-relay adaptive-shaping becn Problem is that when I run data on line e.g. file transfer, bandwidth uses always 16k or less although no other data run on ckt and total available bandwidth is 32 k. The data rate does not reach to peak rate and if I remove traffic shaping then total 32 k used. Is any missing parameter or command in above configuration? regards Khurrum -- ___ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44394&t=44394 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bitswapping Tool [7:44385]
You won't have time. Besides nothing like would be allowed. D. At 01:49 PM 5/17/2002 -0400, Jason Greenberg wrote: >Does anyone know if the CCIE lab gives you access to a bitswapping tool >for converting mac addresses to canonical format? > >-- >Jason Greenberg, CCNP >Network Administrator >Execulink, Inc. >[EMAIL PROTECTED] x$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$: Lucent Technologies - Enhanced Services & Sales NetworkCare Professional Services http//www.lucent.com/netcare/ Darren S. Crawford - CCNP, CCDP, CISSP Distinguished Member of the Consulting Staff Northwest Region - Sacramento Office Voicemail (916) 859-5200 x310 Pager (800) 467-1467 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] x$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$:0`0:$xx$: Every Job is a Self-Portrait of the person Who Did It Autograph Your Work With EXCELLENCE! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44393&t=44385 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OT - Selling routers and CCIE wr. study notes [7:44386]
I'm selling several routers from my home study pod. I've got a 2501, a 4000-m w/6 serial ports and a 2610 w/8 serial ports (great Frame Relay switch). Here's the link on ebay for all the auctions, if anybody is interested (watch the wrap). http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems &userid=laganiere&include=0&since=-1&sort=3&rows=25 I'm including a copy of my accumulated CCIE Written notes with each router, and if anybody from the list ends up being the winner, just let me know and I'll include a white-cover copy of the study guide I wrote the this exam, and a voucher for my Boson (CCIE Written #3). Thanks for helping me clean up my office a bit, and I apologize for the OT (over time)... --- Dennis Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44386&t=44386 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Security Books [7:44347]
I have most of the Cisco security books now. MCNS, PIX, VPN, CIDS etc. etc., the one book I don't have is "Cisco Secure Internet Security Solutions". Looking though the table of contents, it looks like some of the same stuff from the books I already have. Do you think this book is worth getting if I already have these other security books? This is listed for the reading list for CCIE Security as well. Also I don't see any books for CCIE Security in particular, would it be possible for Cisco to make a library for people perusing this track? Or maybe the books I have for CCNP & CSS1 are some of the same books needed for CCIE Security. Any suggestions for a book list for someone who would be attempting a CCIE security written exam? Of course I am also have/doing hands on stuff, and lab work. I know there are some guides from CCbootcamp, i guess that is what most people are using. I was also looking at the "Open Cable" book, not that I am working on that, just thought it would be neat to learn some things about the TV/Cable industry in my spare time J Brian Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44347&t=44347 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
VPN ERROR %CRYPTO-6-IKMP_MODE_FAILURE [7:44374]
Hello, I'm trying make a Fully Meshed VPN connections between 3 (Ra,Rb,Rc) routers 827-4V, The used IOS is: c820-k8osv6y6-mz.122-2.T4.bin -> IP/FW/VOICE PLUS IPSEC 56 When I configure the VPN (Ra-Rb), the VPN it's established OK. But I configure VPN (Ra-Rb and Ra-Rc), the system report a error with the peer Rc, and the VPN it's not established between (Ra-Rc),however, the VPN (Ra-Rb) is OK. I had trying conjugations (Rb-Ra ,Rb-Rc) and (Rc-Ra,Rc-Rb) and (Rb-Rc,Rb-Ra) and (Rc-Rb,Rc-Ra), and I had received the same ERROR. The system error is: %CRYPTO-6-IKMP_MODE_FAILURE: Processing of Informational mode failed with peer at xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx In Cisco I had see only this information: Error Message %CRYPTO-6-IKMP_MODE_FAILURE: Processing of [chars] mode failed with peer at [IP_address] Explanation Negotiation with the remote peer has failed. Recommended Action If this situation persists, contact the remote peer. I had locked many documents in Cisco, but I don't know how to solve this problem. I shearched a document in Cisco for this type VPN http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/ios_meshed.html Flash Configuration: Ra: IP VPN: 100.100.100.170 IP LAN: 10.0.1.1 Rb: IP VPN: 100.100.100.169 IP LAN: 192.168.0.2 Rc: IP VPN: 100.100.100.249 IP LAN: 10.0.0.1 Debug Information router (Ra) when I try connect (Rc-Ra) (debug crypto isakmp) 02:35:37: ISAKMP (0:0): received packet from 100.100.100.249 (N) NEW SA 02:35:37: ISAKMP: local port 500, remote port 500 02:35:37: ISAKMP (0:2): processing SA payload. message ID = 0 02:35:37: ISAKMP (0:2): found peer pre-shared key matching 100.100.100.249 02:35:37: ISAKMP (0:2): Checking ISAKMP transform 1 against priority 1 policy 02:35:37: ISAKMP: encryption DES-CBC 02:35:37: ISAKMP: hash MD5 02:35:37: ISAKMP: default group 1 02:35:37: ISAKMP: auth pre-share 02:35:37: ISAKMP (0:2): atts are acceptable. Next payload is 0 02:35:37: ISAKMP (0:2): SA is doing pre-shared key authentication using id type ID_IPV4_ADDR 02:35:37: ISAKMP (0:2): sending packet to 100.100.100.249 (R) MM_SA_SETUP 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): received packet from 100.100.100.249 (R) MM_SA_SETUP 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): processing KE payload. message ID = 0 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): processing NONCE payload. message ID = 0 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): found peer pre-shared key matching 100.100.100.249 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): SKEYID state generated 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): processing vendor id payload 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): speaking to another IOS box! 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): sending packet to 100.100.100.249 (R) MM_KEY_EXCH 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): received packet from 100.100.100.249 (R) MM_KEY_EXCH 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): processing ID payload. message ID = 0 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): processing HASH payload. message ID = 0 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): SA has been authenticated with 100.100.100.249 02:35:38: ISAKMP (2): ID payload next-payload : 8 type : 1 protocol : 17 port : 500 length : 8 02:35:38: ISAKMP (2): Total payload length: 12 02:35:38: ISAKMP (0:2): sending packet to 100.100.100.249 (R) QM_IDLE 02:35:39: ISAKMP (0:2): received packet from 100.100.100.249 (R) QM_IDLE 02:35:39: ISAKMP (0:2): processing HASH payload. message ID = 1758794445 02:35:39: ISAKMP (0:2): processing SA payload. message ID = 1758794445 02:35:39: ISAKMP (0:2): Checking IPSec proposal 1 02:35:39: ISAKMP: transform 1, ESP_DES 02:35:39: ISAKMP: attributes in transform: 02:35:39: ISAKMP: encaps is 1 02:35:39: ISAKMP: SA life type in seconds 02:35:39: ISAKMP: SA life duration (basic) of 3600 02:35:39: ISAKMP: SA life type in kilobytes 02:35:39: ISAKMP: SA life duration (VPI) of 0x0 0x46 0x50 0x0 02:35:39: ISAKMP: authenticator is HMAC-MD5 02:35:39: ISAKMP (0:2): atts are acceptable. 02:35:39: ISAKMP (0:2): IPSec policy invalidated proposal 02:35:39: ISAKMP (0:2): phase 2 SA not acceptable! 02:35:39: ISAKMP (0:2): sending packet to 100.100.100.249 (R) QM_IDLE 02:35:39: ISAKMP (0:2): purging node -1391497798 02:35:39: %CRYPTO-6-IKMP_MODE_FAILURE: Processing of Quick mode failed with peer at 100.100.100.249 02:35:39: ISAKMP (0:2): deleting node 1758794445 error FALSE reason "IKMP_NO_ERR_NO_TRANS" DEBUG INFORMATION IN (Rc) 02:28:20: ISAKMP: received ke message (1/1) 02:28:20: ISAKMP: local port 500, remote port 500 02:28:20: ISAKMP (0:1): beginning Main Mode exchange 02:28:20: ISAKMP (0:1): sending packet to 100.100.100.170 (I) MM_NO_STATE 02:28:20: ISAKMP (0:1): received packet from 100.100.100.170 (I) MM_NO_STATE 02:28:20: ISAKMP (0:1): processing SA payload. message ID = 0 02:28:20: ISAKMP (0:1): found peer pre-shared key matching 212.64.161.170 02:28:20: ISAKMP (0:1): Checking ISAKMP transform 1 against priority 1 policy 02:28:20: ISAKMP: encryption DES-CBC 02:28:20: ISAKMP: hash MD5 02:28:20: ISAKMP: default group 1 02:28:20: ISAKMP: auth pre-share. 02:28:20: ISAKMP (0:1):
Re: how to build a pix firewall out of a PC box. [7:18335]
The home-built Pix strikes me as being more trouble and expense than it is worth. I read about someone who made one, and he had to use an expensive flash card that cost nearly as much as a base-model Pix. The home-built Pix has certain obvious legal deficiencies, and, it is safe to say, could never be resold to someone who might want to run it in a production network. I'm probably missing something here, but if anyone wants a Pix, there are some shockingly cheap base models that people can buy new from a Cisco reseller (around 400-600 dollars, I seem to remember). I imagine these may lack some functionality that the more expensive Pixes might have, but at least people wouldn't have to go on to bulletin boards asking for license/code numbers to use to make their firewall work. And selling your real Pix or using it a production network would be a possibility. If you want to build a firewall for the fun of building a firewall, it makes more sense to go the Linux/Unix route. Of course, I'm working on R&S, not Security, so there may be some great advantage to these homebuilt Pixes (over the retail Cisco Pix base models) that I am unaware of. ""T Christn"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > What about IDE Flash? Is it possible to use that for a home-built PIX? > Easy to obtain Compact Flash cards and buy adapters to connect to IDE. This > works for a Linux firewall: > > http://chinese-watercolor.com/LRP/ > > > Regardless, I would like to get those instructions from you Mike. > > Thx > > tchristn Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44354&t=18335 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FW: OT - Selling routers [7:44390]
Here are some better links for this, sorry... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2023718078 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2023730604 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2023737187 http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2023817739 --- Dennis -Original Message- From: Dennis Laganiere [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 11:02 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject:OT - Selling routers I'm selling several routers from my home study pod. I've got a 2501, a 4000-m w/6 serial ports and a 2610 w/8 serial ports (great Frame Relay switch). Here's the link on ebay for all the auctions, if anybody is interested (watch the wrap). http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems &userid=laganiere&include=0&since=-1&sort=3&rows% Thanks for helping me clean up my office a bit, and I apologize for the OT (over time)... --- Dennis _ Commercial lab list: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/commercial.html Please discuss commercial lab solutions on this list. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44390&t=44390 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CCIE Number [7:44294]
Here's an interesting little tidbit I picked off of www.ccbootcamp.com - All successful students receive a CCIE number. The first CCIE was issued number #1025. Number #1024 was given to the CCIE Lab. They chose #1024 because 1024 is a kilohertz - "The Lab will kill ya (Kilo), and it hurts (hertz)." Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44334&t=44294 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OT - Selling my CCIE Written library [7:44391]
Here's a better link for this, sorry... http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem &item=2023737187 --- Dennis -Original Message- From: Dennis Laganiere Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 10:46 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: OT - Selling my CCIE Written library I'm selling my library of CCIE Written books on ebay (watch the wrap). http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems &userid=laganiere&include=0&since=-1&sort=3&rows=25 If you're interested in passing 350-001 before it goes away, here's a chance to get all the books in one shot at a good price, plus the notes of one of the authors (I wrote the www.cramsession.com doc, the NLI study guide, and Boson #3 for this exam). Please keep in mind that I won't break the NDA, so these are valid notes and documents I've researched and written, not braindumps. If you want the notes, but don't need the books, I've also got several routers for sale, and I've included a copy of my notes with each of these. Thanks for helping me clean up my office a bit, and I apologize for the OT (over time)... --- Dennis Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44391&t=44391 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OT - Selling my CCIE Written library [7:44383]
I'm selling my library of CCIE Written books on ebay (watch the wrap). http://cgi6.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems &userid=laganiere&include=0&since=-1&sort=3&rows=25 If you're interested in passing 350-001 before it goes away, here's a chance to get all the books in one shot at a good price, plus the notes of one of the authors (I wrote the www.cramsession.com doc, the NLI study guide, and Boson #3 for this exam). Please keep in mind that I won't break the NDA, so these are valid notes and documents I've researched and written, not braindumps. If you want the notes, but don't need the books, I've also got several routers for sale, and I've included a copy of my notes with each of these. Thanks for helping me clean up my office a bit, and I apologize for the OT (over time)... --- Dennis Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44383&t=44383 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OIR 75xxs [7:44310]
As Chris mentions above... a VIP2-50 insertion w/ PA's into a slot will cause other slots to hang/crash about 80% of the time I have found on 7507's (requiring a power cycle to resolve). VIP/PA removal does not seem to be an issue. -Dave Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44389&t=44310 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
Comments inline... nrf wrote: > What I said is that not that I hate all 'lab-rat' CCIE's > because everybody > has to start somewhere.Rather that I find the phenomena that > people view > the CCIE as an easy shortcut highly suspect. This phenomena > manifests > itself in guys obtaining their cert and then immediately > demanding a level > of salary and respect equal to another guy who has > significantly more > experience. A couple of comments here. First, given that the CCIE is quite difficult to obtain, I think that one who has achieved it deserves a certain minumum amount of respect whether they have 'real world' experience or not, and the fact that you (often) use the word 'labrat' to stereotype them denies them even that minimum level of respect. I'm not saying any CCIE (or anyone for that matter) should demand a level of respect which they are not due, but they also (regardless of how obtained) should never be denied that level of respect they've earned, especially from fellow networkers. Second, IMHO, you are making a grave mistake in assuming that experience always teaches one the lessons of networking any more than a certification. Experience can teach things certs dont. But certs can educate someone about things they've never done before they ever have to call upon that knowledge, and one type of knowledge is no less valuable than the other. There are many lessons that someone needs to learn in the school of hard knocks to really understand because the certification doesn't deal with such issues. However, a very wise man once told me, "Sometimes 5 years experience isn't 5 years experience. Many times it's the same 1 year of experience 5 times over". Think about that. I'll give an excellent example that shows this point (which I've given before, but I think it's needed to support my position). I worked with a gentleman at a previous job when I was 3 months into my first 6 months of real hands-on networking experience. This gentleman who had been dealing with Cisco and networking for 5+ years. I had just completed CCNP. He did a sniffer trace and was surprised when he saw multicast traffic and said outloud to all of his fellow "experienced" engineers "Where's this multicast traffic coming from?" I, the lowly inexperienced CCNP, asked "Aren't we using EIGRP" (which we were). He said "Yeah, but what's that got to do with this multicast traffic". I just turned and walked away. I was floored that a room full of engineers with a combined 50+ years of experience couldn't answer this, when ANYONE who has made it through the CCNP Routing exam would have answered the question in a heartbeat. Experience limits you to what you deal with. Certification encourages you (and requires you) to read and learn new things that you may never use just to be exposed to them. Experience is only as good as what it exposes you to. If you have 10 years experience with RIP networks and that's it, then that 10 years may just as well be 6 months. Because all that "experience" isn't going to mean squat in a shop running OSPF/BGF/EIGRP, etc... That's where having the knowledge that a certification gives you is advantageous. > Or it manifests itself in guys who don't want to > pay their dues > and do grunt-work and just want to be the senior network guy > without having > spent any time as the non-senior network guy. It is that kind > of behavior > that is what I'm targeting. Is my finding this phenomena > highly skeptical > really objectionable? I think most people here would find it > quite > reasonable. I think your skepticism here is valid, and a good thing. The only thing I would interject here is this: Believing that one must perform years of simple "go patch these ports in. go mount this switch in the closet" type of gruntwork is nonsense. I'll use myself as an example. (kinda picking up from my story above) After my 6 months of good experience at my first job, and armed with CCNP, I got my current job... Sr. Network Engineer... I setup dial-in access routers, I setup VoIP trunks between PBXs, I implemented many things that were there that they weren't using because they didn't know they could (i.e. using MLS on Cat5500s with RSMs)... No one else here with their vast experience could do or did do any of these things Within 6 months of being here my boss realized that I could take the knowledge from my certs and put them with the built-in skill I had to understand and troubleshoot things, and put me in charge of our multi-state ATM WAN network including charging me with redesigning the way we do our routing, QoS, etc Every day I stand toe-to-toe with my lead network engineer and debate (and most times win) issues regarding switching, routing, etc and this is a guy with 8+ years of (good) experience in Cisco networking. In my case, and I belive the idea behind certs, is that you can gain a vast knowledge of networking in a shorter amount of time (just over 1 year for me f
Re: Please confirm (conf#21134fa18ad663360b9961082e1b2709) [7:44339]
- Original Message - From: To: Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 3:29 PM Subject: Please confirm (conf#21134fa18ad663360b9961082e1b2709) > Hi, > > You have tried to post to GroupStudy.com's Professional mailing list. Because > the server does not recognize you as a confirmed poster, you will be required > to authenticate that you are using a valid e-mail address and are not a > spammer. By confirming this e-mail you certify that you are not sending > Unsolicited Bulk Email (UBE). > > PLEASE DO NOT SEND YOUR ORIGINAL MESSAGE AGAIN! BY CONFIRMING THIS EMAIL > YOUR ORIGINAL MESSAGE (WHICH IS NOW QUEUED IN THE SERVER) WILL BE POSTED. > > > By confirming this e-mail you also certify the following: > > 1. The message does NOT break Cisco's Non-Disclosure requirements. > > 2. The message is NOT designed to advertise a commercial product. > > 3. You understand all postings become property of GroupStudy.com > > 4. You have searched the archives prior to posting. > > 5. The message is NOT inflammatory. > > 6. The message is NOT a test message. > > To confirm, simply reply to this message. No editing is necessary. Once > confirmed, you will be able to post without additional confirmations. > > > Welcome to GroupStudy.com! > > > --ORIGINAL MESSAGE- > > >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri May 17 06:59:06 2002 > Received: (from news@localhost) > by groupstudy.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA12196 > GroupStudy Mailer; Fri, 17 May 2002 06:59:06 -0400 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Path: not-for-mail > From: "Joupin" > Newsgroups: groupstudy.cisco > Subject: HELP pls IPX ROUTING AND VOVELL 3.12 > Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 15:29:52 +0430 > Organization: GroupStudy.com Discussion Groups > Lines: 22 > Message-ID: > NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.217.41.194 > X-Trace: groupstudy.com 1021633145 12185 213.217.41.194 (17 May 2002 10:59:05 GMT) > X-Complaints-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > NNTP-Posting-Date: 17 May 2002 10:59:05 GMT > X-Priority: 3 > X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600. > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600. > > HLP > > Its a long time that I wasn't into Novell NOTware and I forgot everything > Now > I have a project that should be done with 2 Cisco 1601 Router and 2 Novell > 3.12 ! and I should connect these two LAN via a leased line > I don`t have a time to go throw books , > Please if any of u are master in it and Have time to write some HELP HITS > for me > And also I wonder if I should change Network Number of each Novell 3.12 > servers > > > REGARDS > and HELLPPP Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44339&t=44339 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Bitswapping Tool [7:44385]
The question is why would you need to do that. I can see that as a question on the written, but I doubt the lab will require something so theoritcial. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44387&t=44385 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Cisco Certification Digest V2 #2078 (Vacation) [7:44352]
For the love of humanity, or God! Do we have to be reminded DAILY of this guys' being on vacation?!?! You'ld think this one would be dropped in the Que! My apologies... I didn't think I'd let this annoy me, but just at this very momemnt, it did... so no offense meant to ANY of the moderators... I obviously need another Large cup of stiff coffee it's been one of those crazy weeks. Cheers to everyone, have a great weekend I'm sure Stepen Siu is :) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Stephen Siu Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 9:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Cisco Certification Digest V2 #2078 (Vacation) [7:44352] I will be on vacation from 5-7-02 to 5-22-02. Any matter regarding network management please forward to Bob Taylor @ 213-979-0032. Thanks. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44361&t=44352 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bitswapping Tool [7:44385]
Does anyone know if the CCIE lab gives you access to a bitswapping tool for converting mac addresses to canonical format? -- Jason Greenberg, CCNP Network Administrator Execulink, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44385&t=44385 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
Admittedly, what I'm going to discuss is not strictly Cisco certification, but I think it ties in with what NRF says about dues. Eons back, when I was in IBM application programming and user support, I really wanted to get into systems programming. The "real" systems programming manuals (looseleaf) were of rather limited distribution -- not quite a heavy NDA, but "licensed material." As the operating system was updated, new update pages, or complete new manual versions, would replace the old. I began to haunt the trash cans in the systems programming area, grabbing all discarded updates and starting to put them into a one-release-behind library that let me study. Eventually, I was able to go to the head of system programming and establish that I knew enough to be useful, and explained to Irv how I had done it. He respected that -- he, like many other systems programmers of the time, had his job because he was ex-IBM, and indeed having worked his way up their ladder from hardware repair engineer. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44384&t=44342 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: HELP pls ,,,, IPX ROUTING AND VOVELL 3.12 [7:44338]
Just turn on IPX routing and IPX RIP and everything will work itself out :) (Boy, I'm glad I'm not you. How'd you get roped into a project without knowledge of the technology and without the time to learn?) Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44356&t=44338 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
I agree with nrf. People are quick to jump to conclusions and forget to read comments posted in this group. Key word is "READ". -Original Message- From: nrf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 12:53 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342] ""Steven A. Ridder"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I'm no psychologist, but he's posts can be quite aggressive, so I'm going to > say that that is a male behavior pattern. Well, I'd like to think that I'm aggressive only about behavior that I consider objectionable. The behavior to which I'm referring is guys who think that the CCIE not as a stepping stone in a career and a component that belongs in a wide suite of qualifications, but rather as an easy way to make money. Again, this manifests itself in guys who get the lab done and then think they now deserve the same salary as the guy who's been doing networks for ages. Or guys who have decided that they simply don't want to pay their dues and would rather be the senior network guy without having spent any time as the junior network guy. That's what I'm talking about, and I don't think this viewpoint is particularly objectionable or controversial. So when you read other people's comments about my comments, I would just ask you to look at what I have specifically said, and not what other people are claiming that I've said. If you don't agree with what I'm saying, that's fine, but don't put words in my mouth. > > > ""John Neiberger"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I also seem to recall that he is a CCIE and I have to completely > > disagree that his comments have a negative impact on the list. I don't > > recall a single one of his posts that has been unreasonable, including > > his comments in this thread. > > > > To the contrary, he's been an excellent contributor for quite a while. > > I'm not going to speak for him but I do notice that he tends to place > > more value on actual practical knowledge and experience rather than > > certifications alone. It's apparent that he has quite a lot of > > real-world experience in advanced topics so I feel his opinion is always > > worthy of consideration. > > > > Regards, > > John > > > > p.s. It just occurred to me that I really don't even know if nrf is > > male or female! Email aliases such as nrf and noglikirf are pretty > > gender neutral. :-) So, nrf, feel free to replace all references to > > he/him/his with the appropriate gender-specific terms, if necessary. > > > > > > >>> "Steven A. Ridder" 5/17/02 9:47:15 AM >>> > > I believe nrf is a CCIE. > > > > > > ""Erwin"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > nrf, reading all your long, sarcastic, and unreasonable comments, > > mostly > > > having a negative impact on hte Groupstudy, are you actually a CCIE? > > > > > > You seem very jealous about ppl having a CCIE certifications, or at > > least > > > demoralizing ppl not to take CCIE if not 50 years old with rich > > networking > > > experience. > > > > > > > > > ""Tom Monte"" wrote in message > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > I want to write about all the posts that use the words "real" CCIE. > > I > > > hope > > > > we can beat this into the ground and never speak of it again. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.) I think people should spend more time on technical issues and > > career > > > > opportunities and less on putting people into categories. "Yes, I > > have > > > less > > > > Cisco experience than most people on this list, oh my god crucify > > me > > now!" > > > > > > > > Lesson: Everyone starts knowing nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.) I have been working on Cisco certifications since 1999 and I > > > frequently > > > > spend a month studying for a single test, while it took me a month > > to > > get > > > my > > > > MCSE and a month for my CNE. I also only spent about $1,000 on > > those > > > > certifications and at least 8k on Cisco study materials. I also > > read > > alot > > > > about how the CCIE is devalued, because of the new one day format. > > You > > > have > > > > less time and cover the same material that sounds harder to me. > > > > > > > > Lesson: It isn't easy and it isn't cheap. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3.) Jobs only want someone with experience, but how do you get it? > > I > > > didn't > > > > get lucky enough to end up in a job where I got Cisco experience > > early > > in > > > my > > > > career. > > > > > > > > Lesson: No matter how smart you are, luck had something to do with > > your > > > > success today. > > > > > > > > > > > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely > > for > > > > the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > > intended > > > > recipient, please delete the message and all copies of it from > > > > your system, destroy any hard copies of it and contact the sender > > > > b
Re: HELP pls ,,,, IPX ROUTING AND VOVELL 3.12 [7:44338]
At 07:06 AM 5/17/02, Joupin wrote: >HLP > >Its a long time that I wasn't into Novell NOTware and I forgot everything >Now >I have a project that should be done with 2 Cisco 1601 Router and 2 Novell >3.12 ! and I should connect these two LAN via a leased line >I don`t have a time to go throw books , >Please if any of u are master in it and Have time to write some HELP HITS >for me >And also I wonder if I should change Network Number of each Novell 3.12 >servers This will be so easy you will laugh at yourself later for thinking it was hard. ;-) ipx routing interface e0 ipx network abc interface s0 ipx network def Novell 3.12 servers used an internal network number didn't they? Just leave those as is. (Do make sure they are unique, though.) On the Ethernet side of the 1601 routers use the local server's external IPX network number. Those should be unique too. Use a new IPX number for the leased line network. On the Ethernet networks, the default encapsulation (novell-ether) should work, but if not, you may have to change it by adding "encapsulation abc" to the ipx network command. There's more info here: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fatipx_c/2cfipx.htm And some examples here: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fatipx_c/2cfipxex.htm Good luck Priscilla >REGARDS >and HELLPPP Priscilla Oppenheimer http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44380&t=44338 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
Myth or Fact Unless your post includes a statistcal sampling of people who employ CCIEs, I am afraid it isn't a fact. I don't like to speak on behalf of the rest of the world so I chose the word myth, maybe generalization would have been a better choice. My post was directed at all posts that use the words "real" CCIE, not just yours. Point #1 I agree a new CCIE should make less and it is silly to complain about it, but then that wasn't my point and this wasn't directed entirely at you. I object to lumping people into the categories "lab-rat" and calling the CCIE a "piece of paper." There are alot of people on this list working hard and sincerely to obtain there CCIE. Point #2 Again, my post was not entirely directed at you, but the general perception that the CCIE is so easy anyone can do it. I am sure the difficulty will still discourage most people from pursuing the CCIE, even if your posts don't. :O Point #3 I am sure we are all happy you are in the "clever lucky not a paper CCIE" group. My point was be thankful for what you have, because there are alot of people who would like to be CCIEs. -Original Message- From: nrf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 10:46 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342] I have a feeling that I'm going to regret doing this. But anyway, inline. The bottom line is that these aren't 'myths', but actual facts as to how Cisco engineers are perceived by employers. ""Tom Monte"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I want to write about all the posts that use the words "real" CCIE. I hope > we can beat this into the ground and never speak of it again. > > > 1.) I think people should spend more time on technical issues and career > opportunities and less on putting people into categories. "Yes, I have less > Cisco experience than most people on this list, oh my god crucify me now!" > > Lesson: Everyone starts knowing nothing. Look, I never said there was anything wrong with knowing less than the next guy. The real problem is knowing less than the next guy and still demanding the same respect and pay as that next guy simply because you have a piece of paper, and then when you don't get that same respect and pay, then whining incessantly about it. Again, the problem is not that lab-rats exist, but that they have delusions of grandeur. > > > 2.) I have been working on Cisco certifications since 1999 and I frequently > spend a month studying for a single test, while it took me a month to get my > MCSE and a month for my CNE. I also only spent about $1,000 on those > certifications and at least 8k on Cisco study materials. I also read alot > about how the CCIE is devalued, because of the new one day format. You have > less time and cover the same material that sounds harder to me. > > Lesson: It isn't easy and it isn't cheap. But on the other hand, while things may not be cheap or easy, things may have gotten cheaper or easier. I'm not referring to the one-day test for which it is still unclear whether it is easier or not (in fact I suspect probably not). But the fact is that when something gets easier, it inevitably gets devalued. > > > 3.) Jobs only want someone with experience, but how do you get it? I didn't > get lucky enough to end up in a job where I got Cisco experience early in my > career. > > Lesson: No matter how smart you are, luck had something to do with your > success today. But so do things like hard work and ambition. Luck indeed plays a role in everybody's life, I would be a fool to say otherwise. But I believe it is also true that you can 'make your own luck'. When two groups of people are presented the same set of opportunities, the first group may exploit them much more effectively than the second group. For example, I'll make a digresssion here, the history of United States immigration (and actually immigration around the world) is replete with such examples, where penniless immigrant ethnic groups were forced to take the worst possible job opportunities or the worst possible farming land (because they couldn't speak English or due to overt discrimination or whatever) that the native population could not or would not exploit, but after a few generations, those immigrants were earning incomes equal to or exceeding that of the native population. How's this possible if your success primarily is dictated primarily by whether you were provided opportunities or not? It's not so much whether you are exposed to lots of opportunities but what you do with the opportunities you are exposed to that really determines your success. Taking it back to the networking arena, I know lots of guys who weren't provided opportunities to run networks. Rather, they had to 'provide themselves' with opportunites by basically hanging around the network guys at night or on the weekends on their own time. Or when their companies were offering network training to o
as5200 question? [7:44379]
I created a local pool for my dialup users. However once the user dial in he does obtain an unique ip address but his gateway is the same and he is unable to ping any router or switch or server once inside the network How can I change the setting so that he gets a unique gateway? Any useful links? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44379&t=44379 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Internet Simulator [7:44348]
There really are such things as Internet simulators, although there are different kinds. I'm in the process of setting one up at Gettlabs, which may not be scalable to a home lab. It consists of multiple routers, plus *NIX PCs running BGP update generators including Zebra and BGPsim. What this lets me do is to generate more complex AS paths than is possible with a couple of routers in a pod, and also to generate errors (bad AS paths, flapping routes, etc.). The individual user pods see it as several ISPs with various numbers of POPs, with a "reasonable" number of routes -- not a full global table. For a different sort of simulator, look at http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/bmwg-charter.html and you'll see simulator methodology Internet Drafts for BGP and OSPF. You will also find RFCs and Internet Drafts about a different kind of simulator -- throughput testers. Realistically, the CCIE exam does not test Internet routes nearly as complex as we see in the real world. I don't know if there is a market for this more advanced BGP stuff--to some extent, I am doing it as a research project and possibly for custom classes. At 11:38 AM -0400 5/17/02, Mark Odette II wrote: >Naim, > >You could always play along, and tell him that you got yourself one of them >there "Internet Simulators", and that it's the best thing since sliced >bread you really love that Fractional T3 you now have at home :) > >The secret is in the back to back cable and the bandwidth command. ;^) > >You could have some real fun with that :) > >Mark > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >Kazan, Naim >Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 9:31 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: Internet Simulator [7:44348] > > >I was thinking the same thing but I got sucked in to believe that something >existed by my friend...He's got a can of whoop ass waiting for him WWF >style. > >-Original Message- >From: Johnny Routin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 9:53 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Internet Simulator [7:44348] > > >A internet simulator... h... first time I heard that one ;) You can use >a router interface connected to another router to simulate the "internet." > >JR >-- >Johnny Routin >The "Routin" One > -- "What Problem are you trying to solve?" ***send Cisco questions to the list, so all can benefit -- not directly to me*** Howard C. Berkowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Chief Technology Officer, GettLab/Gett Communications http://www.gettlabs.com Technical Director, CertificationZone.com http://www.certificationzone.com "retired" Certified Cisco Systems Instructor (CID) #93005 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44378&t=44348 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Help needed [7:44360]
In my opinion, these are the default commands entered. While configuring CET, same sort of issue is there and i concluded that these are the default commands. If anyone has got any idea about that? Shoaib --- jc theard wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm configuring a Cisco 2621 for VPN connection. Im > typing in the > configuration and I dont get any error message but > when I want to see my > running config, some part of the config are not > there > > here is a part of the IPSEC config I want to have: > > crypto map vpnmap 50 ipsec-manual > set peer 63.104.50.75 > set session-key inbound esp 1022521 authenticator > 300089000edf100034000edf > set session-key outbound esp 235098 authenticator > 980001000edf340001000edf > set transform-set vpntransform > match address 100 > > Here is what I see after "show running-config": > > crypto map vpnmap 50 ipsec-manual > set peer 63.104.50.75 > set transform-set vpntransform > match address 100 > > everythg related to session-key is not shown !!?? > Does anybody know why it's hidden or deleted?? > > Thanx a lot > > jctheard [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44377&t=44360 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
""Steven A. Ridder"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I'm no psychologist, but he's posts can be quite aggressive, so I'm going to > say that that is a male behavior pattern. Well, I'd like to think that I'm aggressive only about behavior that I consider objectionable. The behavior to which I'm referring is guys who think that the CCIE not as a stepping stone in a career and a component that belongs in a wide suite of qualifications, but rather as an easy way to make money. Again, this manifests itself in guys who get the lab done and then think they now deserve the same salary as the guy who's been doing networks for ages. Or guys who have decided that they simply don't want to pay their dues and would rather be the senior network guy without having spent any time as the junior network guy. That's what I'm talking about, and I don't think this viewpoint is particularly objectionable or controversial. So when you read other people's comments about my comments, I would just ask you to look at what I have specifically said, and not what other people are claiming that I've said. If you don't agree with what I'm saying, that's fine, but don't put words in my mouth. > > > ""John Neiberger"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I also seem to recall that he is a CCIE and I have to completely > > disagree that his comments have a negative impact on the list. I don't > > recall a single one of his posts that has been unreasonable, including > > his comments in this thread. > > > > To the contrary, he's been an excellent contributor for quite a while. > > I'm not going to speak for him but I do notice that he tends to place > > more value on actual practical knowledge and experience rather than > > certifications alone. It's apparent that he has quite a lot of > > real-world experience in advanced topics so I feel his opinion is always > > worthy of consideration. > > > > Regards, > > John > > > > p.s. It just occurred to me that I really don't even know if nrf is > > male or female! Email aliases such as nrf and noglikirf are pretty > > gender neutral. :-) So, nrf, feel free to replace all references to > > he/him/his with the appropriate gender-specific terms, if necessary. > > > > > > >>> "Steven A. Ridder" 5/17/02 9:47:15 AM >>> > > I believe nrf is a CCIE. > > > > > > ""Erwin"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > nrf, reading all your long, sarcastic, and unreasonable comments, > > mostly > > > having a negative impact on hte Groupstudy, are you actually a CCIE? > > > > > > You seem very jealous about ppl having a CCIE certifications, or at > > least > > > demoralizing ppl not to take CCIE if not 50 years old with rich > > networking > > > experience. > > > > > > > > > ""Tom Monte"" wrote in message > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > I want to write about all the posts that use the words "real" CCIE. > > I > > > hope > > > > we can beat this into the ground and never speak of it again. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1.) I think people should spend more time on technical issues and > > career > > > > opportunities and less on putting people into categories. "Yes, I > > have > > > less > > > > Cisco experience than most people on this list, oh my god crucify > > me > > now!" > > > > > > > > Lesson: Everyone starts knowing nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.) I have been working on Cisco certifications since 1999 and I > > > frequently > > > > spend a month studying for a single test, while it took me a month > > to > > get > > > my > > > > MCSE and a month for my CNE. I also only spent about $1,000 on > > those > > > > certifications and at least 8k on Cisco study materials. I also > > read > > alot > > > > about how the CCIE is devalued, because of the new one day format. > > You > > > have > > > > less time and cover the same material that sounds harder to me. > > > > > > > > Lesson: It isn't easy and it isn't cheap. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3.) Jobs only want someone with experience, but how do you get it? > > I > > > didn't > > > > get lucky enough to end up in a job where I got Cisco experience > > early > > in > > > my > > > > career. > > > > > > > > Lesson: No matter how smart you are, luck had something to do with > > your > > > > success today. > > > > > > > > > > > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely > > for > > > > the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > > intended > > > > recipient, please delete the message and all copies of it from > > > > your system, destroy any hard copies of it and contact the sender > > > > by return e-mail. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44376&t=44342 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTE
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
""Erwin"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > nrf, reading all your long, sarcastic, and unreasonable comments, mostly > having a negative impact on hte Groupstudy, are you actually a CCIE? Interesting. I get this a lot. But let me ask you this. Let's say I was a CCIE, would it change your mind? Probably not, so why exactly should I tell you one way or another? Because looks like you're not going to agree with me no matter what. > > You seem very jealous about ppl having a CCIE certifications, or at least > demoralizing ppl not to take CCIE if not 50 years old with rich networking > experience. Really? Did I say that? Please provide me instances where I have typed such a thing. Don't put words in my mouth. What I said is that not that I hate all 'lab-rat' CCIE's because everybody has to start somewhere.Rather that I find the phenomena that people view the CCIE as an easy shortcut highly suspect. This phenomena manifests itself in guys obtaining their cert and then immediately demanding a level of salary and respect equal to another guy who has significantly more experience. Or it manifests itself in guys who don't want to pay their dues and do grunt-work and just want to be the senior network guy without having spent any time as the non-senior network guy. It is that kind of behavior that is what I'm targeting. Is my finding this phenomena highly skeptical really objectionable? I think most people here would find it quite reasonable. > > > ""Tom Monte"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I want to write about all the posts that use the words "real" CCIE. I > hope > > we can beat this into the ground and never speak of it again. > > > > > > 1.) I think people should spend more time on technical issues and career > > opportunities and less on putting people into categories. "Yes, I have > less > > Cisco experience than most people on this list, oh my god crucify me now!" > > > > Lesson: Everyone starts knowing nothing. > > > > > > 2.) I have been working on Cisco certifications since 1999 and I > frequently > > spend a month studying for a single test, while it took me a month to get > my > > MCSE and a month for my CNE. I also only spent about $1,000 on those > > certifications and at least 8k on Cisco study materials. I also read alot > > about how the CCIE is devalued, because of the new one day format. You > have > > less time and cover the same material that sounds harder to me. > > > > Lesson: It isn't easy and it isn't cheap. > > > > > > 3.) Jobs only want someone with experience, but how do you get it? I > didn't > > get lucky enough to end up in a job where I got Cisco experience early in > my > > career. > > > > Lesson: No matter how smart you are, luck had something to do with your > > success today. > > > > > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for > > the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended > > recipient, please delete the message and all copies of it from > > your system, destroy any hard copies of it and contact the sender > > by return e-mail. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44375&t=44342 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
I'm no psychologist, but he's posts can be quite aggressive, so I'm going to say that that is a male behavior pattern. ""John Neiberger"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I also seem to recall that he is a CCIE and I have to completely > disagree that his comments have a negative impact on the list. I don't > recall a single one of his posts that has been unreasonable, including > his comments in this thread. > > To the contrary, he's been an excellent contributor for quite a while. > I'm not going to speak for him but I do notice that he tends to place > more value on actual practical knowledge and experience rather than > certifications alone. It's apparent that he has quite a lot of > real-world experience in advanced topics so I feel his opinion is always > worthy of consideration. > > Regards, > John > > p.s. It just occurred to me that I really don't even know if nrf is > male or female! Email aliases such as nrf and noglikirf are pretty > gender neutral. :-) So, nrf, feel free to replace all references to > he/him/his with the appropriate gender-specific terms, if necessary. > > > >>> "Steven A. Ridder" 5/17/02 9:47:15 AM >>> > I believe nrf is a CCIE. > > > ""Erwin"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > nrf, reading all your long, sarcastic, and unreasonable comments, > mostly > > having a negative impact on hte Groupstudy, are you actually a CCIE? > > > > You seem very jealous about ppl having a CCIE certifications, or at > least > > demoralizing ppl not to take CCIE if not 50 years old with rich > networking > > experience. > > > > > > ""Tom Monte"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > I want to write about all the posts that use the words "real" CCIE. > I > > hope > > > we can beat this into the ground and never speak of it again. > > > > > > > > > 1.) I think people should spend more time on technical issues and > career > > > opportunities and less on putting people into categories. "Yes, I > have > > less > > > Cisco experience than most people on this list, oh my god crucify > me > now!" > > > > > > Lesson: Everyone starts knowing nothing. > > > > > > > > > 2.) I have been working on Cisco certifications since 1999 and I > > frequently > > > spend a month studying for a single test, while it took me a month > to > get > > my > > > MCSE and a month for my CNE. I also only spent about $1,000 on > those > > > certifications and at least 8k on Cisco study materials. I also > read > alot > > > about how the CCIE is devalued, because of the new one day format. > You > > have > > > less time and cover the same material that sounds harder to me. > > > > > > Lesson: It isn't easy and it isn't cheap. > > > > > > > > > 3.) Jobs only want someone with experience, but how do you get it? > I > > didn't > > > get lucky enough to end up in a job where I got Cisco experience > early > in > > my > > > career. > > > > > > Lesson: No matter how smart you are, luck had something to do with > your > > > success today. > > > > > > > > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely > for > > > the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the > intended > > > recipient, please delete the message and all copies of it from > > > your system, destroy any hard copies of it and contact the sender > > > by return e-mail. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44373&t=44342 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Netmeeting over Cisco PIX VPN connection [7:44188]
I'm not sure if anyone ever replied to this, but I'll have a stab at comments. SmartStudent, The VPN 3000 Client, to my understanding is a Dynamic VPN client, rather than a Static VPN client such as what a PIX to PIX VPN scenario or PIX to VPN Concentrator Scenario utilizes. The nature of the Dynamic VPN means simply this- The "Server" end of the VPN Tunnel has no clue as to what the client's IP address, is, so the Server can't initiate a tunnel to the VPN Client 3000 Host. If you put a PIX 506 at each remote office, and a PIX 515 or 525 at the Central office, and the remotes have at least one, but preferably two public addresses assigned by the ISP, you should be good to go. One other thing to keep in mind... if you choose to go with ADSL for the remote offices, and it's a basic service... you'll essentially have a 128K connection upstream from your remote offices to the central office... and that could potentially prohibit things a bit for data/voice quality. The point being not to forget about that upstream speed I have had several customers in the past recently that have forgotten that... and then were P!$$ed off when they thought they were supposed to get near T1 speeds between offices at such a "great telco rate". HTH's Mark -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Smart Student Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2002 4:09 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Netmeeting over Cisco PIX VPN connection [7:44188] Hi All, Across our different offices we use netmeeting to make voice calls over our private WAN network but the cost of maintaining the private wan is forcing us to look at cheaper options like VPN, so we are in the process of testing out Cisco PIX product as our firewall & VPN for our remote offices , central office would have Cisco PIX or Cisco VPN concentrator 3000 , in this enviroment I am facing problems with Netmeeting. When I established Site to site VPN thru PIX & VPN concentrator , Netmeeting works fine from the network behind PIX to the network behind VPN concentrator, but when I try to do netmeeting from the remote access Vpn using vpn 3000 cleint I am facing a unique problem , the Remote access VPN client machine (connecting to either PIX or VPN concentrator ) is able to setup Netmeeting call with the PC's in the LAN behind the VPN concentrator or PIX but the reverse does not happen, Can anyone guide me about I am be doing wrong. regards, Sstudent Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at http://email.indiatimes.com Buy Music, Video, CD-ROM, Audio-Books and Music Accessories from http://www.planetm.co.in Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44372&t=44188 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Recent List Issues [7:44317]
At 7:20 PM -0400 5/16/02, John Neiberger wrote: >As you probably noticed the list has been >having some intermittent issues recently. >As a few others have already been doing, I'm >going to be helping Paul with list >moderation. Hopefully, with enough of us >checking the list periodically we'll be able >catch it in case it goes down. > >I've been seeing a few emails trickling in >now that Paul has reset a few things so I'm >hoping things are back to normal. I hope >so, I'm starting to go through withdrawal >symptoms. :-) > Do we need a 12-step program yet? Or would that be 12 layers? Or 7 steps? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44371&t=44317 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
I also seem to recall that he is a CCIE and I have to completely disagree that his comments have a negative impact on the list. I don't recall a single one of his posts that has been unreasonable, including his comments in this thread. To the contrary, he's been an excellent contributor for quite a while. I'm not going to speak for him but I do notice that he tends to place more value on actual practical knowledge and experience rather than certifications alone. It's apparent that he has quite a lot of real-world experience in advanced topics so I feel his opinion is always worthy of consideration. Regards, John p.s. It just occurred to me that I really don't even know if nrf is male or female! Email aliases such as nrf and noglikirf are pretty gender neutral. :-) So, nrf, feel free to replace all references to he/him/his with the appropriate gender-specific terms, if necessary. >>> "Steven A. Ridder" 5/17/02 9:47:15 AM >>> I believe nrf is a CCIE. ""Erwin"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > nrf, reading all your long, sarcastic, and unreasonable comments, mostly > having a negative impact on hte Groupstudy, are you actually a CCIE? > > You seem very jealous about ppl having a CCIE certifications, or at least > demoralizing ppl not to take CCIE if not 50 years old with rich networking > experience. > > > ""Tom Monte"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I want to write about all the posts that use the words "real" CCIE. I > hope > > we can beat this into the ground and never speak of it again. > > > > > > 1.) I think people should spend more time on technical issues and career > > opportunities and less on putting people into categories. "Yes, I have > less > > Cisco experience than most people on this list, oh my god crucify me now!" > > > > Lesson: Everyone starts knowing nothing. > > > > > > 2.) I have been working on Cisco certifications since 1999 and I > frequently > > spend a month studying for a single test, while it took me a month to get > my > > MCSE and a month for my CNE. I also only spent about $1,000 on those > > certifications and at least 8k on Cisco study materials. I also read alot > > about how the CCIE is devalued, because of the new one day format. You > have > > less time and cover the same material that sounds harder to me. > > > > Lesson: It isn't easy and it isn't cheap. > > > > > > 3.) Jobs only want someone with experience, but how do you get it? I > didn't > > get lucky enough to end up in a job where I got Cisco experience early in > my > > career. > > > > Lesson: No matter how smart you are, luck had something to do with your > > success today. > > > > > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for > > the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended > > recipient, please delete the message and all copies of it from > > your system, destroy any hard copies of it and contact the sender > > by return e-mail. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44370&t=44342 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Internet Simulator [7:44348]
Basically you can use a router with some loopback interfaces and use BGP to distribute "fake" internet routes. Look also on the Caslow or Solie. Ciao Maurizio - Original Message - From: "Kazan, Naim" To: Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 3:49 PM Subject: Internet Simulator [7:44348] > Hi > > I am in the process of building home CCIE Lab. Does anyone help me with > finding a internet simulator device similar to ISDN simulation. > > -Original Message- > From: Stefan Razeshu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 7:33 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: how to limit bandwidth [7:44335] > > > try to look > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ > c/qcprt2/qcdcq.htm#73920 > and also at > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ > c/qcprt2/qcdconmg.htm#20680 > > you can implement this using custom queue > > Have fun > Stefan Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44369&t=44348 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
You caught me! ""Michael Williams"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Steve, > > Is 'nrf' your alter ego? LOL =) > > Steven A. Ridder wrote: > > > > I believe nrf is a CCIE. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44368&t=44342 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
Steve, Is 'nrf' your alter ego? LOL =) Steven A. Ridder wrote: > > I believe nrf is a CCIE. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44367&t=44342 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Routers for Sale/Exchange [7:44336]
How much do you want in ea?? Alex ""Albert Lu"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I've got some 2500 routers left for sale or exchange: > 2501 > 2503 > 2509 > > I'm looking to exchange for a good PC or Laptop. > > Let me know if your interested. > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience > http://launch.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44364&t=44336 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Internet Simulator [7:44348]
You know what, I think I will take your advice up and watch him squirm itching his head thinking how in the hell I did he do that. -Original Message- From: Mark Odette II [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 11:38 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Internet Simulator [7:44348] Naim, You could always play along, and tell him that you got yourself one of them there "Internet Simulators", and that it's the best thing since sliced bread you really love that Fractional T3 you now have at home :) The secret is in the back to back cable and the bandwidth command. ;^) You could have some real fun with that :) Mark -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kazan, Naim Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 9:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Internet Simulator [7:44348] I was thinking the same thing but I got sucked in to believe that something existed by my friend...He's got a can of whoop ass waiting for him WWF style. -Original Message- From: Johnny Routin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 9:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Internet Simulator [7:44348] A internet simulator... h... first time I heard that one ;) You can use a router interface connected to another router to simulate the "internet." JR -- Johnny Routin The "Routin" One ""Kazan, Naim"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hi > > I am in the process of building home CCIE Lab. Does anyone help me with > finding a internet simulator device similar to ISDN simulation. > > -Original Message- > From: Stefan Razeshu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 7:33 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: how to limit bandwidth [7:44335] > > > try to look > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ > c/qcprt2/qcdcq.htm#73920 > and also at > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ > c/qcprt2/qcdconmg.htm#20680 > > you can implement this using custom queue > > Have fun > Stefan Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44366&t=44348 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Pix 515 on ADSL Help! :) [7:44346]
Brian,
add the following to your config, and then try your pings again.
---
PIX#(config) conduit permit icmp any any
---
I believe your PPPoE connection is working, as proof from your output below:
>>PPPoE Tunnel and Session Information (Total tunnels=1 sessions=1)
>> Tunnel id 0, 1 active sessions
>> time since change 6015 secs
>> Remote MAC Address 00:00:00:xx
>> 1010 packets sent, 1023 received, 12641 bytes sent, 0 received
>> Remote MAC is 00:00:
>>Session state is SESSION_UP
>> Time since event change 7687 secs, interface outside
>> PPP interface id is 1
>> 1010 packets sent, 1023 received, 12641 bytes sent, 0 received
HTHs,
Mark
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Brian Zeitz
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 8:48 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Pix 515 on ADSL Help! :) [7:44346]
Well, I upgraded my pix 515 to 6.2. I am kind of new to firewalls,
besides I can't use the PDM. "This version of PDM does not officially
support PIX 6.2(1). Please upgrade PDM.", I guess this is a good reason
to learn the command line in pix. I cant ping theISPs DNS servers from
the PDM. Any way to test if my Username and password is working for ADSL
?
My ISP (verizon, requires a U/P for PPPoE, I am not sure if it is
accepting the password. The modem lights are all green.
Anyhow, it's saying UP/UP, and I have the link up, but I am not sure how
to check if my PPPOE password is working. I am using CHAP, maybe this is
not right.
I donno, it looks like its working, but I cant get outside, even if I
use the DHCP Server feature. I am also wondering if failover is going to
work with ADSL, which is another issue. Keep in mind I am not sure if
the 515 will even work with ADSL as someone pointed out, it may not be
supported although I am running Pix 6.2(1)
My question is how can I test that my PPPoE required Username and
password are correct, and I am authenticated. I am now working on
getting Debug PPPoE to see maybe if I can find out if this is working.
Any pointers would be helpful.
mydev# show vpdn username
vpdn username vez2bxe password
mydev# show vpdn group verz1
vpdn group verz1 request dialout pppoe
vpdn group verz1 localname vez2vbxe
vpdn group verz1 ppp authentication chap
mydev# show vpdn pppinterface
PPP virtual interface id = 1
PPP authentication protocol is CHAP
Server ip address is 10.10.26.10
Our ip address is 151.22.13.12
Transmitted Pkts: 1096, Received Pkts: 1109, Error Pkts: 0
MPPE key strength is None
MPPE_Encrypt_Pkts: 0, MPPE_Encrypt_Bytes: 0
MPPE_Decrypt_Pkts: 0, MPPE_Decrypt_Bytes: 0
Rcvd_Out_Of_Seq_MPPE_Pkts: 0
mydev(config)# show int e0
interface ethernet0 "outside" is up, line protocol is up
Hardware is i82559 ethernet, address is 0.000.
IP address 151.22.13.13, subnet mask 255.255.255.255
MTU 1492 bytes, BW 1 Kbit half duplex
1410 packets input, 84908 bytes, 0 no buffer
Received 464 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants
0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored, 0 abort
1305 packets output, 272926 bytes, 0 underruns
0 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets
0 babbles, 0 late collisions, 0 deferred
1 lost carrier, 0 no carrier
input queue (curr/max blocks): hardware (128/128) software (0/1)
output queue (curr/max blocks): hardware (0/1) software (0/1)
vesdev.com(config)#
mydev# show vpdn
%No active L2TP tunnels
%No active PPTP tunnels
PPPoE Tunnel and Session Information (Total tunnels=1 sessions=1)
Tunnel id 0, 1 active sessions
time since change 6015 secs
Remote MAC Address 00:00:00:xx
1010 packets sent, 1023 received, 12641 bytes sent, 0 received
Remote MAC is 00:00:
Session state is SESSION_UP
Time since event change 7687 secs, interface outside
PPP interface id is 1
1010 packets sent, 1023 received, 12641 bytes sent, 0 received
usage: debug pppoe {error|packet|event}
Usage: [no] debug icmp trace
[no] debug packet [src [netmask ]]
[dst [netmask ]]
[[proto icmp]|[proto tcp [sport ] [dport ]]
|[proto udp [sport ] [dport d_p]] [rx|tx|both]
[no] debug sqlnet
[no] debug crypto ipsec|isakmp|ca
[no] debug dhcpc detail|error|packet
[no] debug dhcpd event|packet
[no] debug vpdn error|event|packet
[no] debug ppp error|io|uauth|chap|upap|negotiation
[no] debug pppoe error|packet|event
[no] debug ssh
[no] debug h323 h225|h245|ras asn|event
[no] debug fover
[no] debug rtsp
[no] debug fixup
[no] debug rip
[no] debug pdm history
[no] debug ssl [cipher|device]
[no] debug dns
[no] debug sip
[no] debug skinny
[no] debug access-list
[no] debug radius [session|a
RE: slb on 7609 [7:44337]
We've been using IOS SLB on our 6509s for about a month now and it works great Because we were using an authentication method, we wanted someone to be directed to the same web server they originally connected to after even a few hours of idle time, so we had to tweak our idle timer (set it for 6 hours). But it's been working like a champ for us. Mike W. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44363&t=44337 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
I believe nrf is a CCIE. ""Erwin"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > nrf, reading all your long, sarcastic, and unreasonable comments, mostly > having a negative impact on hte Groupstudy, are you actually a CCIE? > > You seem very jealous about ppl having a CCIE certifications, or at least > demoralizing ppl not to take CCIE if not 50 years old with rich networking > experience. > > > ""Tom Monte"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I want to write about all the posts that use the words "real" CCIE. I > hope > > we can beat this into the ground and never speak of it again. > > > > > > 1.) I think people should spend more time on technical issues and career > > opportunities and less on putting people into categories. "Yes, I have > less > > Cisco experience than most people on this list, oh my god crucify me now!" > > > > Lesson: Everyone starts knowing nothing. > > > > > > 2.) I have been working on Cisco certifications since 1999 and I > frequently > > spend a month studying for a single test, while it took me a month to get > my > > MCSE and a month for my CNE. I also only spent about $1,000 on those > > certifications and at least 8k on Cisco study materials. I also read alot > > about how the CCIE is devalued, because of the new one day format. You > have > > less time and cover the same material that sounds harder to me. > > > > Lesson: It isn't easy and it isn't cheap. > > > > > > 3.) Jobs only want someone with experience, but how do you get it? I > didn't > > get lucky enough to end up in a job where I got Cisco experience early in > my > > career. > > > > Lesson: No matter how smart you are, luck had something to do with your > > success today. > > > > > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for > > the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended > > recipient, please delete the message and all copies of it from > > your system, destroy any hard copies of it and contact the sender > > by return e-mail. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44362&t=44342 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Help needed [7:44360]
Hi all, I'm configuring a Cisco 2621 for VPN connection. Im typing in the configuration and I dont get any error message but when I want to see my running config, some part of the config are not there here is a part of the IPSEC config I want to have: crypto map vpnmap 50 ipsec-manual set peer 63.104.50.75 set session-key inbound esp 1022521 authenticator 300089000edf100034000edf set session-key outbound esp 235098 authenticator 980001000edf340001000edf set transform-set vpntransform match address 100 Here is what I see after "show running-config": crypto map vpnmap 50 ipsec-manual set peer 63.104.50.75 set transform-set vpntransform match address 100 everythg related to session-key is not shown !!?? Does anybody know why it's hidden or deleted?? Thanx a lot jctheard Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44360&t=44360 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Internet Simulator [7:44348]
Naim, You could always play along, and tell him that you got yourself one of them there "Internet Simulators", and that it's the best thing since sliced bread you really love that Fractional T3 you now have at home :) The secret is in the back to back cable and the bandwidth command. ;^) You could have some real fun with that :) Mark -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kazan, Naim Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 9:31 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Internet Simulator [7:44348] I was thinking the same thing but I got sucked in to believe that something existed by my friend...He's got a can of whoop ass waiting for him WWF style. -Original Message- From: Johnny Routin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 9:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Internet Simulator [7:44348] A internet simulator... h... first time I heard that one ;) You can use a router interface connected to another router to simulate the "internet." JR -- Johnny Routin The "Routin" One ""Kazan, Naim"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hi > > I am in the process of building home CCIE Lab. Does anyone help me with > finding a internet simulator device similar to ISDN simulation. > > -Original Message- > From: Stefan Razeshu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 7:33 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: how to limit bandwidth [7:44335] > > > try to look > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ > c/qcprt2/qcdcq.htm#73920 > and also at > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ > c/qcprt2/qcdconmg.htm#20680 > > you can implement this using custom queue > > Have fun > Stefan Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44359&t=44348 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
nrf, reading all your long, sarcastic, and unreasonable comments, mostly having a negative impact on hte Groupstudy, are you actually a CCIE? You seem very jealous about ppl having a CCIE certifications, or at least demoralizing ppl not to take CCIE if not 50 years old with rich networking experience. ""Tom Monte"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I want to write about all the posts that use the words "real" CCIE. I hope > we can beat this into the ground and never speak of it again. > > > 1.) I think people should spend more time on technical issues and career > opportunities and less on putting people into categories. "Yes, I have less > Cisco experience than most people on this list, oh my god crucify me now!" > > Lesson: Everyone starts knowing nothing. > > > 2.) I have been working on Cisco certifications since 1999 and I frequently > spend a month studying for a single test, while it took me a month to get my > MCSE and a month for my CNE. I also only spent about $1,000 on those > certifications and at least 8k on Cisco study materials. I also read alot > about how the CCIE is devalued, because of the new one day format. You have > less time and cover the same material that sounds harder to me. > > Lesson: It isn't easy and it isn't cheap. > > > 3.) Jobs only want someone with experience, but how do you get it? I didn't > get lucky enough to end up in a job where I got Cisco experience early in my > career. > > Lesson: No matter how smart you are, luck had something to do with your > success today. > > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for > the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended > recipient, please delete the message and all copies of it from > your system, destroy any hard copies of it and contact the sender > by return e-mail. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44358&t=44342 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NAT & Access List question [7:44357]
All, I need to setup my first real NAT statement (as opposed to just a PAT statement) and I need some help with the Access List config. I have a T1 with 6 public IP's, with all my users nat'ing through the last 2 IP's with an ip nat pool/source list statement. The list basically blocks outgoing kazaa, netbios, and morpheus. I have my email server pat'd to another IP higher in the list and the problem I am running in to is that the mail server uses the same IP's in the nat pool statement when it sends mail out - which is causing me reverse lookup headaches. So I want to do a true nat statement for the mail server so it's sending and receiving IP's are the same and I can get a reverse lookup setup for it. If I understand IP/TCP/UDP correctly, the client establishes a connection to the service port on the remote computer and the remote computer in turn establishes a connection to some random port > 1024 on the client. Is that correct? So the issue for now becomes, how to restrict access to the mail server for just 22, (for remote management) 25, 110, and 6169 (a webmail server) and still allow the returning nat connections to the clients? This is what I picture so far. access-list 101 permit tcp any (external ip) eq 22 access-list 101 permit tcp any (external ip) eq 25 access-list 101 permit tcp any (external ip) eq 110 access-list 101 permit tcp any (external ip) eq 6169 access-list 101 deny tcp any any lt 1024 access-list 101 deny udp any any lt 1024 then I start to get a bit hazy as to the returning nat connections for the clients..perhaps access-list 101 permit tcp/upd any any range 1025-65535? I'm assuming also that this will be applied in on the Serial interface. Any help greatly appreciated!!! Stephen Hoover Dallas, Texas Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44357&t=44357 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
accessing server slow over t1 [7:44355]
Hi group I have an issue that has come up , and maybe someone can guide me in making a design much better. In my central office I have a ls1010 which connects to several 3810 mc at each campus , its basically an atm network. My question is how come when im at the campus it take like a minute to access my server in the central office. By the way to each location I have t1' and the ls1010 is in turn connected to a 7500 router via oc3 connection, which in turn has fast Ethernet cards that go to my lan , server, How can I speed the access of remote users? Should I use route maps? Guarantee bandwith? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44355&t=44355 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco Certification Digest V2 #2078 (Vacation) [7:44352]
I will be on vacation from 5-7-02 to 5-22-02. Any matter regarding network management please forward to Bob Taylor @ 213-979-0032. Thanks. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44352&t=44352 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
I have a feeling that I'm going to regret doing this. But anyway, inline. The bottom line is that these aren't 'myths', but actual facts as to how Cisco engineers are perceived by employers. ""Tom Monte"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I want to write about all the posts that use the words "real" CCIE. I hope > we can beat this into the ground and never speak of it again. > > > 1.) I think people should spend more time on technical issues and career > opportunities and less on putting people into categories. "Yes, I have less > Cisco experience than most people on this list, oh my god crucify me now!" > > Lesson: Everyone starts knowing nothing. Look, I never said there was anything wrong with knowing less than the next guy. The real problem is knowing less than the next guy and still demanding the same respect and pay as that next guy simply because you have a piece of paper, and then when you don't get that same respect and pay, then whining incessantly about it. Again, the problem is not that lab-rats exist, but that they have delusions of grandeur. > > > 2.) I have been working on Cisco certifications since 1999 and I frequently > spend a month studying for a single test, while it took me a month to get my > MCSE and a month for my CNE. I also only spent about $1,000 on those > certifications and at least 8k on Cisco study materials. I also read alot > about how the CCIE is devalued, because of the new one day format. You have > less time and cover the same material that sounds harder to me. > > Lesson: It isn't easy and it isn't cheap. But on the other hand, while things may not be cheap or easy, things may have gotten cheaper or easier. I'm not referring to the one-day test for which it is still unclear whether it is easier or not (in fact I suspect probably not). But the fact is that when something gets easier, it inevitably gets devalued. > > > 3.) Jobs only want someone with experience, but how do you get it? I didn't > get lucky enough to end up in a job where I got Cisco experience early in my > career. > > Lesson: No matter how smart you are, luck had something to do with your > success today. But so do things like hard work and ambition. Luck indeed plays a role in everybody's life, I would be a fool to say otherwise. But I believe it is also true that you can 'make your own luck'. When two groups of people are presented the same set of opportunities, the first group may exploit them much more effectively than the second group. For example, I'll make a digresssion here, the history of United States immigration (and actually immigration around the world) is replete with such examples, where penniless immigrant ethnic groups were forced to take the worst possible job opportunities or the worst possible farming land (because they couldn't speak English or due to overt discrimination or whatever) that the native population could not or would not exploit, but after a few generations, those immigrants were earning incomes equal to or exceeding that of the native population. How's this possible if your success primarily is dictated primarily by whether you were provided opportunities or not? It's not so much whether you are exposed to lots of opportunities but what you do with the opportunities you are exposed to that really determines your success. Taking it back to the networking arena, I know lots of guys who weren't provided opportunities to run networks. Rather, they had to 'provide themselves' with opportunites by basically hanging around the network guys at night or on the weekends on their own time. Or when their companies were offering network training to only a certain group of employees, they immediately finagled their way and played the corporate political game into making sure they were included in that training. These are just some examples of guys 'making their own luck'. This is the kind of attitude that fosters greater success. > > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for > the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended > recipient, please delete the message and all copies of it from > your system, destroy any hard copies of it and contact the sender > by return e-mail. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44353&t=44342 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Internet Simulator [7:44348]
I was thinking the same thing but I got sucked in to believe that something existed by my friend...He's got a can of whoop ass waiting for him WWF style. -Original Message- From: Johnny Routin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 9:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Internet Simulator [7:44348] A internet simulator... h... first time I heard that one ;) You can use a router interface connected to another router to simulate the "internet." JR -- Johnny Routin The "Routin" One ""Kazan, Naim"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hi > > I am in the process of building home CCIE Lab. Does anyone help me with > finding a internet simulator device similar to ISDN simulation. > > -Original Message- > From: Stefan Razeshu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 7:33 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: how to limit bandwidth [7:44335] > > > try to look > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ > c/qcprt2/qcdcq.htm#73920 > and also at > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ > c/qcprt2/qcdconmg.htm#20680 > > you can implement this using custom queue > > Have fun > Stefan Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44351&t=44348 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Internet Simulator [7:44348]
Hi I am in the process of building home CCIE Lab. Does anyone help me with finding a internet simulator device similar to ISDN simulation. -Original Message- From: Stefan Razeshu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 7:33 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: how to limit bandwidth [7:44335] try to look http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ c/qcprt2/qcdcq.htm#73920 and also at http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ c/qcprt2/qcdconmg.htm#20680 you can implement this using custom queue Have fun Stefan Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44348&t=44348 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pix 515 on ADSL Help! :) [7:44346]
Well, I upgraded my pix 515 to 6.2. I am kind of new to firewalls,
besides I can't use the PDM. "This version of PDM does not officially
support PIX 6.2(1). Please upgrade PDM.", I guess this is a good reason
to learn the command line in pix. I cant ping theISPs DNS servers from
the PDM. Any way to test if my Username and password is working for ADSL
?
My ISP (verizon, requires a U/P for PPPoE, I am not sure if it is
accepting the password. The modem lights are all green.
Anyhow, it's saying UP/UP, and I have the link up, but I am not sure how
to check if my PPPOE password is working. I am using CHAP, maybe this is
not right.
I donno, it looks like its working, but I cant get outside, even if I
use the DHCP Server feature. I am also wondering if failover is going to
work with ADSL, which is another issue. Keep in mind I am not sure if
the 515 will even work with ADSL as someone pointed out, it may not be
supported although I am running Pix 6.2(1)
My question is how can I test that my PPPoE required Username and
password are correct, and I am authenticated. I am now working on
getting Debug PPPoE to see maybe if I can find out if this is working.
Any pointers would be helpful.
mydev# show vpdn username
vpdn username vez2bxe password
mydev# show vpdn group verz1
vpdn group verz1 request dialout pppoe
vpdn group verz1 localname vez2vbxe
vpdn group verz1 ppp authentication chap
mydev# show vpdn pppinterface
PPP virtual interface id = 1
PPP authentication protocol is CHAP
Server ip address is 10.10.26.10
Our ip address is 151.22.13.12
Transmitted Pkts: 1096, Received Pkts: 1109, Error Pkts: 0
MPPE key strength is None
MPPE_Encrypt_Pkts: 0, MPPE_Encrypt_Bytes: 0
MPPE_Decrypt_Pkts: 0, MPPE_Decrypt_Bytes: 0
Rcvd_Out_Of_Seq_MPPE_Pkts: 0
mydev(config)# show int e0
interface ethernet0 "outside" is up, line protocol is up
Hardware is i82559 ethernet, address is 0.000.
IP address 151.22.13.13, subnet mask 255.255.255.255
MTU 1492 bytes, BW 1 Kbit half duplex
1410 packets input, 84908 bytes, 0 no buffer
Received 464 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants
0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored, 0 abort
1305 packets output, 272926 bytes, 0 underruns
0 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets
0 babbles, 0 late collisions, 0 deferred
1 lost carrier, 0 no carrier
input queue (curr/max blocks): hardware (128/128) software (0/1)
output queue (curr/max blocks): hardware (0/1) software (0/1)
vesdev.com(config)#
mydev# show vpdn
%No active L2TP tunnels
%No active PPTP tunnels
PPPoE Tunnel and Session Information (Total tunnels=1 sessions=1)
Tunnel id 0, 1 active sessions
time since change 6015 secs
Remote MAC Address 00:00:00:xx
1010 packets sent, 1023 received, 12641 bytes sent, 0 received
Remote MAC is 00:00:
Session state is SESSION_UP
Time since event change 7687 secs, interface outside
PPP interface id is 1
1010 packets sent, 1023 received, 12641 bytes sent, 0 received
usage: debug pppoe {error|packet|event}
Usage: [no] debug icmp trace
[no] debug packet [src [netmask ]]
[dst [netmask ]]
[[proto icmp]|[proto tcp [sport ] [dport ]]
|[proto udp [sport ] [dport d_p]] [rx|tx|both]
[no] debug sqlnet
[no] debug crypto ipsec|isakmp|ca
[no] debug dhcpc detail|error|packet
[no] debug dhcpd event|packet
[no] debug vpdn error|event|packet
[no] debug ppp error|io|uauth|chap|upap|negotiation
[no] debug pppoe error|packet|event
[no] debug ssh
[no] debug h323 h225|h245|ras asn|event
[no] debug fover
[no] debug rtsp
[no] debug fixup
[no] debug rip
[no] debug pdm history
[no] debug ssl [cipher|device]
[no] debug dns
[no] debug sip
[no] debug skinny
[no] debug access-list
[no] debug radius [session|all|user ]
[no] debug ntp
[adjust|authentication|events|loopfilter|packets|params|
select|sync|validity]
[no] debug ils
[no] debug igmp
[no] debug mfwd
mydev#
mydev# debug pppoe
usage: debug pppoe {error|packet|event}
Usage: [no] debug icmp trace
[no] debug packet [src [netmask ]]
[dst [netmask ]]
[[proto icmp]|[proto tcp [sport ] [dport ]]
|[proto udp [sport ] [dport d_p]] [rx|tx|both]
[no] debug sqlnet
[no] debug crypto ipsec|isakmp|ca
[no] debug dhcpc detail|error|packet
[no] debug dhcpd event|packet
[no] debug vpdn error|event|packet
[no] debug ppp error|io|uauth|chap|upap|negotiation
[no] debug pppoe error|packet|event
[no] debug ssh
[no] debug h323 h225|h245|ras asn|event
Re: E&M [7:44326]
Try 12.2.7. Anything in the mainline is more stable than a T train release. Unless you need SRST, move to mainline ""Sujal G. Ajmera"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Would anyone know which IOS is the 'ideal' one for this? > > I've tried c3660-is-mz_121-5._T7 > and > c3660-is-mz_121.9 > > Thanks, > > Sujal > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Steven A. Ridder > Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 5:21 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: E&M [7:44326] > > > IOS issue > > -- > > RFC 1149 Compliant. > Get in my head: > http://sar.dynu.com > > > ""Sujal G. Ajmera"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > Hi, > > > > Two 1750 2V's with E&M inside can talk to each other but one 3660 with a > > 1750 2V cannot. > > > > Any thoughts on this? > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Sujal > > > > [GroupStudy.com removed an attachment of type application/ms-tnef which > had > > a name of winmail.dat] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44350&t=44326 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Internet Simulator [7:44348]
A internet simulator... h... first time I heard that one ;) You can use a router interface connected to another router to simulate the "internet." JR -- Johnny Routin The "Routin" One ""Kazan, Naim"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hi > > I am in the process of building home CCIE Lab. Does anyone help me with > finding a internet simulator device similar to ISDN simulation. > > -Original Message- > From: Stefan Razeshu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 7:33 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: how to limit bandwidth [7:44335] > > > try to look > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ > c/qcprt2/qcdcq.htm#73920 > and also at > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_ > c/qcprt2/qcdconmg.htm#20680 > > you can implement this using custom queue > > Have fun > Stefan Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44349&t=44348 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HELP pls ,,,, IPX ROUTING AND VOVELL 3.12 [7:44338]
HLP Its a long time that I wasn't into Novell NOTware and I forgot everything Now I have a project that should be done with 2 Cisco 1601 Router and 2 Novell 3.12 ! and I should connect these two LAN via a leased line I don`t have a time to go throw books , Please if any of u are master in it and Have time to write some HELP HITS for me And also I wonder if I should change Network Number of each Novell 3.12 servers REGARDS and HELLPPP Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44338&t=44338 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: why my gigabit switch port speed only hit 10M? [7:44333]
You must have some dog slow hard drives... Be sure to keep you Mb and your MB straight when speaking of hard drive speeds I have an "older" (a couple of years old) Western Digital 7200RPM 30GB drive that I record and edit video on, and it gets around 26MBytes/sec throughput on read and around 24Mbytes/sec on writes. Virtually all modern IDE drive can easily top 100Mbps (12.5MBytes/sec) any good drive made in the last couple of years (7200RPM) can usually read and write (sustained throughput) up to and over 25 to 30Mbytes/sec (200-240Mbps or more). And this is just a single drive if you have a server with RAID5 kicking, you could theoretically fully utilize 1Gbps, however, the bus in the PC (sever) usually become the bottleneck at that point (even the 64-bit PCI bus that most high end servers (even running at 66MHz) can only handle 512Mbps of throughput, so getting a full 1Gbps throughput from a PC is basically out of the question AFAIK). Mike W. "Rick" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Make sure your PC's are capable of transferring data faster > than this. There is not many hard drives that can do 100mb/s. > My laptop I am on now tops out at about 8.5mb but my PC > goes up to about 17mb. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44345&t=44333 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: how to limit bandwidth [7:44335]
try to look http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_c/qcprt2/qcdcq.htm#73920 and also at http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_c/qcprt2/qcdconmg.htm#20680 you can implement this using custom queue Have fun Stefan Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44340&t=44335 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: E&M [7:44326]
Would anyone know which IOS is the 'ideal' one for this? I've tried c3660-is-mz_121-5._T7 and c3660-is-mz_121.9 Thanks, Sujal -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Steven A. Ridder Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 5:21 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: E&M [7:44326] IOS issue -- RFC 1149 Compliant. Get in my head: http://sar.dynu.com ""Sujal G. Ajmera"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hi, > > Two 1750 2V's with E&M inside can talk to each other but one 3660 with a > 1750 2V cannot. > > Any thoughts on this? > > Thanks, > > > Sujal > > [GroupStudy.com removed an attachment of type application/ms-tnef which had > a name of winmail.dat] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44344&t=44326 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: why my gigabit switch port speed only hit 10M? [7:44333]
Make sure your PC's are capable of transferring data faster than this. There is not many hard drives that can do 100mb/s. My laptop I am on now tops out at about 8.5mb but my PC goes up to about 17mb. ""Sim, CT (Chee Tong)"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hi.. I had installed a gigabit switch (Cisco 3550). But I feel the speed > of slow. I connected my two PC in GigabitEthernet0/1 and 0/2. I transfer a > huge file between the two PCs ( the transfer last for 4 mins). But the > maximum speed is only 10Mbit ? Why?? What is wrong?? I thought it should > be go up to 1000M or 1Gbits??? > > ! > interface GigabitEthernet0/1 > no ip address > snmp trap link-status > ! > interface GigabitEthernet0/2 > no ip address > snmp trap link-status > ! > interface GigabitEthernet0/3 > no ip address > snmp trap link-status > ! > interface GigabitEthernet0/4 > no ip address > snmp trap link-status > ! > interface GigabitEthernet0/5 > no ip address > snmp trap link-status > ! > > cat35-L8-1#sh int gi0/1 > GigabitEthernet0/1 is up, line protocol is up > Hardware is Gigabit Ethernet, address is 0005.313e.7581 (bia > 0005.313e.7581) > MTU 1500 bytes, BW 100 Kbit, DLY 10 usec, > reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 1/255 > Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set > Keepalive set (10 sec) > Full-duplex, 1000Mb/s > input flow-control is off, output flow-control is on > ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00 > Last input never, output 00:00:00, output hang never > Last clearing of "show interface" counters never > Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 0 > Queueing strategy: fifo > Output queue :0/40 (size/max) > 5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec > 5 minute output rate 12000 bits/sec, 14 packets/sec > 905784 packets input, 1303109052 bytes, 0 no buffer > Received 66 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles > 0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored > 0 input packets with dribble condition detected > 1042863 packets output, 190194068 bytes, 0 underruns > 0 output errors, 0 collisions, 2 interface resets > 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred > 0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier > 0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out > GigabitEthernet0/2 is up, line protocol is up > Hardware is Gigabit Ethernet, address is 0005.313e.7582 (bia > 0005.313e.7582) > MTU 1500 bytes, BW 100 Kbit, DLY 10 usec, > reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 1/255 > Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set > Keepalive set (10 sec) > Full-duplex, 1000Mb/s > input flow-control is off, output flow-control is on > ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00 > Last input never, output 00:00:00, output hang never > Last clearing of "show interface" counters never > Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 0 > Queueing strategy: fifo > Output queue :0/40 (size/max) > 5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec > 5 minute output rate 12000 bits/sec, 13 packets/sec > 1486 packets input, 179522 bytes, 0 no buffer > Received 1421 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles > 0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored > 0 input packets with dribble condition detected > 1948976 packets output, 1493416902 bytes, 0 underruns > 0 output errors, 0 collisions, 2 interface resets > 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred > 0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier > 0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out > > > > > > == > De informatie opgenomen in dit bericht kan vertrouwelijk zijn en > is uitsluitend bestemd voor de geadresseerde. Indien u dit bericht > onterecht ontvangt wordt u verzocht de inhoud niet te gebruiken en > de afzender direct te informeren door het bericht te retourneren. > == > The information contained in this message may be confidential > and is intended to be exclusively for the addressee. Should you > receive this message unintentionally, please do not use the contents > herein and notify the sender immediately by return e-mail. > > > == Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44343&t=44333 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dispelling CCIE myths [7:44342]
I want to write about all the posts that use the words "real" CCIE. I hope we can beat this into the ground and never speak of it again. 1.) I think people should spend more time on technical issues and career opportunities and less on putting people into categories. "Yes, I have less Cisco experience than most people on this list, oh my god crucify me now!" Lesson: Everyone starts knowing nothing. 2.) I have been working on Cisco certifications since 1999 and I frequently spend a month studying for a single test, while it took me a month to get my MCSE and a month for my CNE. I also only spent about $1,000 on those certifications and at least 8k on Cisco study materials. I also read alot about how the CCIE is devalued, because of the new one day format. You have less time and cover the same material that sounds harder to me. Lesson: It isn't easy and it isn't cheap. 3.) Jobs only want someone with experience, but how do you get it? I didn't get lucky enough to end up in a job where I got Cisco experience early in my career. Lesson: No matter how smart you are, luck had something to do with your success today. This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the message and all copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and contact the sender by return e-mail. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44342&t=44342 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: E&M [7:44326]
IOS issue -- RFC 1149 Compliant. Get in my head: http://sar.dynu.com ""Sujal G. Ajmera"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Hi, > > Two 1750 2V's with E&M inside can talk to each other but one 3660 with a > 1750 2V cannot. > > Any thoughts on this? > > Thanks, > > > Sujal > > [GroupStudy.com removed an attachment of type application/ms-tnef which had > a name of winmail.dat] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44341&t=44326 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
why my gigabit switch port speed only hit 10M? [7:44333]
Hi.. I had installed a gigabit switch (Cisco 3550). But I feel the speed of slow. I connected my two PC in GigabitEthernet0/1 and 0/2. I transfer a huge file between the two PCs ( the transfer last for 4 mins). But the maximum speed is only 10Mbit ? Why?? What is wrong?? I thought it should be go up to 1000M or 1Gbits??? ! interface GigabitEthernet0/1 no ip address snmp trap link-status ! interface GigabitEthernet0/2 no ip address snmp trap link-status ! interface GigabitEthernet0/3 no ip address snmp trap link-status ! interface GigabitEthernet0/4 no ip address snmp trap link-status ! interface GigabitEthernet0/5 no ip address snmp trap link-status ! cat35-L8-1#sh int gi0/1 GigabitEthernet0/1 is up, line protocol is up Hardware is Gigabit Ethernet, address is 0005.313e.7581 (bia 0005.313e.7581) MTU 1500 bytes, BW 100 Kbit, DLY 10 usec, reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 1/255 Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set Keepalive set (10 sec) Full-duplex, 1000Mb/s input flow-control is off, output flow-control is on ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00 Last input never, output 00:00:00, output hang never Last clearing of "show interface" counters never Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 0 Queueing strategy: fifo Output queue :0/40 (size/max) 5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec 5 minute output rate 12000 bits/sec, 14 packets/sec 905784 packets input, 1303109052 bytes, 0 no buffer Received 66 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles 0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored 0 input packets with dribble condition detected 1042863 packets output, 190194068 bytes, 0 underruns 0 output errors, 0 collisions, 2 interface resets 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred 0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier 0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out GigabitEthernet0/2 is up, line protocol is up Hardware is Gigabit Ethernet, address is 0005.313e.7582 (bia 0005.313e.7582) MTU 1500 bytes, BW 100 Kbit, DLY 10 usec, reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 1/255 Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set Keepalive set (10 sec) Full-duplex, 1000Mb/s input flow-control is off, output flow-control is on ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00 Last input never, output 00:00:00, output hang never Last clearing of "show interface" counters never Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 0 Queueing strategy: fifo Output queue :0/40 (size/max) 5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec 5 minute output rate 12000 bits/sec, 13 packets/sec 1486 packets input, 179522 bytes, 0 no buffer Received 1421 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles 0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored 0 input packets with dribble condition detected 1948976 packets output, 1493416902 bytes, 0 underruns 0 output errors, 0 collisions, 2 interface resets 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 0 deferred 0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier 0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out == De informatie opgenomen in dit bericht kan vertrouwelijk zijn en is uitsluitend bestemd voor de geadresseerde. Indien u dit bericht onterecht ontvangt wordt u verzocht de inhoud niet te gebruiken en de afzender direct te informeren door het bericht te retourneren. == The information contained in this message may be confidential and is intended to be exclusively for the addressee. Should you receive this message unintentionally, please do not use the contents herein and notify the sender immediately by return e-mail. == Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44333&t=44333 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
slb on 7609 [7:44337]
I'm considering running slb on a 7609 to load balance across a number of DNS servers. Wondering when others have done this if this has worked well (no bugs, good performance, etc.). Would also be interested in what MIBs or traps where used for monitoring slb operation and performance Thanks Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44337&t=44337 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco 2500 memory updrade [7:44329]
Yes the memories are from CISCO and I found the serials also on the Cisco site as the recomandation. It is well inserted and is happening in two situations. First when I try to add the second 8MB flash or when I try to change the SIMM for RAM. Stephan Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44332&t=44329 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OT: Routers for Sale/Exchange [7:44336]
I've got some 2500 routers left for sale or exchange: 2501 2503 2509 I'm looking to exchange for a good PC or Laptop. Let me know if your interested. __ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44336&t=44336 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
how to limit bandwidth [7:44335]
I am using NAT on one PVC config on a 1600 carring different traffic types, I would like to limit the bandwidth used from (our)ppl downloading and in turn provide more for those outside(public) 'surfing' our sites. Now i looked(tried) at various queuing techniques and got lost in the process (to the point that i almost forgot the question)(Maby there4s an easier way ;) ). Can anyone help? _ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44335&t=44335 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cisco 2500 memory updrade [7:44329]
Did you upgrade the DIMM memory from 8MB to 16MB? Have you got the appropriate DIMM module, where did you buy it? Did you insert it properly? Is the error message the same after you tried to reboot one more time? >From what you have shown here, it indicates that the router is not able to detect the DIMM module you just inserted. ""Stefan Razeshu"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I have tried to upgrade the DIMM memory for my 2500 .After I replace the > DIMM with a 16MB module i receive the following message: > System Bootstrap, Version 11.0(10c), SOFTWARE > Copyright (c) 1986-1996 by cisco Systems > and the router freeze. No Contole-Breake available. > Do you have any ideas? > Beat regards > Stefan Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44331&t=44329 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cisco 2500 memory updrade [7:44329]
I have tried to upgrade the DIMM memory for my 2500 .After I replace the DIMM with a 16MB module i receive the following message: System Bootstrap, Version 11.0(10c), SOFTWARE Copyright (c) 1986-1996 by cisco Systems and the router freeze. No Contole-Breake available. Do you have any ideas? Beat regards Stefan Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44329&t=44329 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cisco Secure Access Control Server [7:44328]
With regards to the TACACS+ accounting logs produced by ACS, does anyone know what "nas port re-used" means? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44328&t=44328 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Terminal Server load balancing [7:44002]
As I said before load balancing is okey, the problem is with statistics. For example when you especialy look to the statistics with sh service summary and sh summary you see 4 persons on server 5 when you looked from server 5 there are 7 persons. This is the problem I am trying to tell. Although there are 7 persons connected to server 5 CSS show only 4 persons connected to server 5. Best regards, ""Greene, Patrick"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > What are you balancing on? Have you configured the CSS to balance on > least connections because the default is round robin. These are your > load balancing options, Round Robin(default),Weighted Round Robin,Least > Connections/Bytes, and > ArrowPoint Content Aware (ACA). > > If you want to balance based on least connections, in the content rule > specify "balance leastconn" to balance based on connections. > > Sincerely, > Patrick J Greene > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Cisco Breaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 3:26 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Terminal Server load balancing [7:44002] > > > Hi, > > We have implemented load balancing between 5 microsoft terminal servers. > The problem is when I looked at the second server I see 5 people > connected but from the CSS view there is only 2 people connected. We > tried this example with clearing counters on CSS and restarting all > terminal servers to make sure everyone disconnected. After that again we > check the statistics and nothing changed. For ex. Cisco shows 4 > Microsoft shows 8. > > All the statistic gathered by issuing sh service summary and sh summary > are not accurate as Microsoft Terminal Server Managers. > > What can be the problem? > > Any help will be appreciated? > > Best regards, Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44327&t=44002 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
