Re: MAC Address [7:62251]
In most cases you will only re-write the source mac address when traversing across a L3 device. If you go across a layer 2 network, all the mac address's would typically be part of the same broadcast domain and not need to be changed. If you go across a T1 or Frame it will still be mapped to or have an assigned IP Address that constitutes a layer 3 hop and write its mac address in the frame. However if I am wrong here, Priscilla or Howard or Chuck will let me know...:) Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems - Original Message - From: Cisco Newbie To: Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 11:42 AM Subject: RE: MAC Address [7:62251] First, thanks for all that responded. One clarification that I need address is the following: If I cross a L3 router and the outgoing interface is something other than Ethernet, will the L2 frame show a new MAC address? In other words, if my outgoing interface is say T1 PPP or even a dial-up, should I be seeing a new MAC address? Is it only when I cross a L3 device AND my outgoing interface is a share medium like Ethernet that a new MAC address will be placed on the frame? Thanks. - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62306t=62251 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Conf of E1 controller card [7:62307]
Hi Buddy, Can anyone tell me how to configure the port E1 controller on 7206 router. Thanks Regards, Milind Tare __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62307t=62307 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Working - Finallly !!! RE: IPSec over Tunnel [7:62260]
It's exactly as I have in my email earlier. The only thing that I changed was: #remove access-list 102 -not needed as ospf and other ip traffic is inside the tunnel #change access-list 199 referenced in the cryptomap: RTA# serial ip = 120.20.26.2 255.255.255.0 tunnel ip = 120.20.59.2 255.255.255.0 Similiar setup on RTB: On both routers set the access-list 199 to: #access-list 199 permit gre 120.20.59.0 0.0.0.255 120.20.26.0 0.0.0.255 The key here is gre not ip and permit source(tunnel netw) to dest. (serial ip). I do not have access to my routers right now but if you need more I will email it to you once I get my new ip from Cox. Sincerely, CN From: cebuano To: 'Cisco Nuts' Subject: RE: Working - Finallly !!! RE: IPSec over Tunnel [7:62260] Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 13:31:39 -0500 Hey CN, Do you mind sending me the configs? I'd like to mock this up too. TIA. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Cisco Nuts Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 11:42 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Working - Finallly !!! RE: IPSec over Tunnel [7:62260] YES It finally worked!! I had to permit the tunnel ip of the other side(A) to the serial ip on this side(B) for gre and vice versa on the other side. Thank you very much for your help. This gives me great confidence to surge forward regarding tackling route redistribution and routing loops in the real Lab.(next month)!! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: IPSec over Tunnel - not working !! [7:62124] Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 13:30:54 GMT Are you using 'crypto map mymap' on the interface connected to R6? I did not see it on your configuration. Where is 102 access-list applied? The access-list referenced by 'crypto map mymap 10 ipsec-isakmp' should be something like this: access-list xxx permit gre 120.20.59.0 255.255.255.0 yyy.yyy.yyy.yyy 255.255.255.0, where yyy is the address of the remote tunnel. This way you are telling the router to IPSEC the gre traffic sourced by the tunnel, destinated to the remote tunnel. The OSPF traffic will be inside the tunnel, so IPSEC will encrypt OSPF as well. === R2# crypto isakmp policy 1 authentication pre-share group 2 crypto isakmp key shared address 6.6.6.6 ! ! crypto ipsec transform-set myset esp-des esp-md5-hmac ! crypto map mymap local-address Loopback0 crypto map mymap 10 ipsec-isakmp set peer 6.6.6.6 set transform-set myset match address 199 ! interface Tunnel1 ip address 120.20.59.2 255.255.255.0 ip access-group 102 in tunnel source 120.20.26.2 tunnel destination 120.20.26.6 crypto map mymap ! access-list 102 permit ospf any any log access-list 102 permit gre any any log access-list 102 permit icmp any any echo access-list 102 permit icmp any any echo-reply access-list 102 permit tcp any any eq 50 access-list 102 permit tcp any any eq 51 access-list 102 permit udp any any eq isakmp! access-list 199 permit ip 120.20.0.0 0.0.255.255 120.20.0.0 0.0.255.255 access-list 199 permit ip 2.2.2.0 0.0.0.255 any log!What am I doing wrong?Please help.Thank you.Sincerely,CN Cisco Nuts @groupstudy.com em 30/01/2003 09:00:13 Favor responder a Cisco Nuts Enviado Por: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Assunto: RE: IPSec over Tunnel - not working !! [7:62124] Hello Claudio, No luck.I denied the tunnel intf. itself in the access-list and still same problem. The ospf neighbor relation goes down... R6-C#sh access-lists 199 Extended IP access list 199 deny ip 120.20.59.0 0.0.0.255 120.20.59.0 0.0.0.255 permit ip 120.20.0.0 0.0.255.55 120.20.0.0 0.0.255.255 permit ip 2.2.2.0 0.0.0.255 any log R6-C#ri tu 1 Building configuration... Current configuration : 164 bytes ! interface Tunnel1 ip address 120.20.59.6 255.255.255.0 ip access-group 102 in tunnel source 120.20.26.6 tunnel destination 120.20.26.2 crypto map mymap end R6-C# 2d23h: OSPF: 2.2.2.2 address 120.20.59.2 on Tunnel1 is dead 2d23h: OSPF: 2.2.2.2 address 120.20.59.2 on Tunnel1 is dead, state DOWN R6-C# 2d23h: %OSPF-5-ADJCHG: Process 1, Nbr 2.2.2.2 on Tunnel1 from FULL to DOWN, Neighbor Down: Dead timer expired The moment I remove the crypto map from the tunnel intf. it all starts working again!! Any ideas? From: Claudio Spescha Reply-To: Claudio Spescha To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: IPSec over Tunnel - not working !! [7:62124] Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 20:54:40 GMT Hello You should not encrypt the tunnel network itself. First line of access-list 199 should be: access-list 199 deny ip 120.20.59.0 0.0.0.255 120.20.59.0 0.0.0.255 The router can not build an OSPF adjacency on encrypted traffic. see misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- - The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* misconduct
Re: IRB Routing IP and Bridging IPX [7:62303]
0a997d.shtml Firesox a icrit dans le message de news: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Folks I am a little stuck in IRB config. I have two 2620 routers connected via T1. I would llike to route IP and bridge IPX. On the routed IP network I need to run OSPF to connect to other networks. I am looking for a sample config to do this, but cannot find it a good one at Cisco site. Thanks a million in advance Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62310t=62303 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Conf of E1 controller card [7:62307]
cont e1 0/0 framing crc4 | no-crc4 linecode hdb3 clock source line primary [is u have a 7000 and multiple E1's, the other will be secondary] line primary [if u have a 3600, 4000, AS5000, all other ports will secondary] pri-group timeslots 1-31 [if u want to use it all] int se 0/0:15 configure this based on ur use of dialer profiles, rotary groups, or legacy ddr, as if u would a bri, if u want to allow modem call on the pri, ur idle time outs, switch type etc milind tare a icrit dans le message de news: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Buddy, Can anyone tell me how to configure the port E1 controller on 7206 router. Thanks Regards, Milind Tare __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62309t=62307 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CCIE or a masters degree? [7:62287]
sorry, i dont know mate :( not my strong point dude! -Original Message- From: Sam Sneed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 January 2003 21:55 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: CCIE or a masters degree? [7:62287] I was wondering, should I go for. haha fooled you. If it takes trickery to get this question answered so be it. don't take this post the wrong way... I have a 3600 router that current supports PPTP win2K clients using win2K client. I do not wnat to use Cisco client for VPN. What I am trying to do is authenticate using digital certificates. The Cert server is Win2K certificate server. I used a MS machine as VPN server with certificates and it works. I now need to get the Cisco router to do the same. Currently VPN users connecting to 3640 router and are authenticated via IAS using domain logons and it works fine this way. Has anyone implemented this? The router has certificate and it all looks OK. I'm not sure how to configure the router to use digital certificates to authenticate the users instead of username/password. When I try to login I get verifying username and password and then error 619 : the specifoed port is not connected. Here is config: aaa new-model aaa authentication login default group tacacs+ local line none aaa authentication ppp default group radius aaa authorization network default group radius none enable secret 5 $1$2MGM$ttPEfWBYGVf.Hc78TEuwn0 vpdn enable ! vpdn-group 1 ! Default PPTP VPDN group accept-dialin protocol pptp virtual-template 1 ! vpdn-group 2 ! ! crypto ca identity mscert enrollment mode ra enrollment url http://99.17.4.20:80/certsrv/mscep/mscep.dll crypto ca certificate chain mscert certificate 61285CC90004 ... ... 1CAC37AB 61BDC6 quit certificate ra-sign 6144F5320002 .. quit certificate ra-encrypt 6144F7EF0003 . . certificate ca 1B36F87430D2D4AC47DC9C0E1C4D9320 interface Virtual-Template1 ip unnumbered FastEthernet0/0 ip nat inside ip mroute-cache no keepalive peer default ip address pool vpn ppp encrypt mppe 128 required ppp authentication ms-chap ppp timeout authentication 5 ! ip local pool vpn 123.17.10.31 123.17.10.254 . For more information about Barclays Capital, please visit our web site at http://www.barcap.com. Internet communications are not secure and therefore the Barclays Group does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message. Although the Barclays Group operates anti-virus programmes, it does not accept responsibility for any damage whatsoever that is caused by viruses being passed. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Barclays Group. Replies to this email may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or business reasons. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62311t=62287 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: route reflector question [7:61900]
Got a chance to test this. The RR will reflect the best path based on it's own local view of the world. Thus, if everything is equal for a collection of advertisements to X, the RR will compute it's IGP cost to each next-hop, and select the next-hop that it is closest to. This path is then reflected to all clients. While I didn't confirm this with two RRs, it seems that it might make sense for the RRs to be at different parts of the network so that each might generate different best paths which are then reflected to the clients. Clients then can select between those two paths as to which is closest. bergenpeak wrote: Question about route reflector operation. It appears that a RR, when provided with multiple routes to the same destination, will pick the best path and then reflect this best path to the appropriate set of clients and non-clients. I had expected that the RR would simply just reflect routes and not perform route selection on behalf of clients. While this does have benefits to lower-end RR clients, I'm curious as to how step 8 of the BGP decision process is made. Step 8 is where an iBGP router, for a set of equal routes, will compute the IGP cost to the route's next-hop, and select the path whose next-hop is IGP closest. How is this step performed by the RR? Does the RR compute the IGP cost from itself to the next-hop, or does it attempt to compute the IGP cost from each client to the next-hop? I get the impression that it is the former (RR to nexthop). If this is correct, then might one expect sub-optimal BGP routes selection at times as the cost is from the RR to the next-hop and not the real cost from an iBGP client to the next-hop? Much like aggregation, some sub-optimalities might be the price paid to scale. Just trying to verify how path selection is handled when RR's are present. Thanks Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62312t=61900 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NAT QUESTION [7:62313]
Please can someone tell me if multiple Private Static IPs can be NAT'ed to one Public IP address. when i try to did that it gave me an error Router(config)#ip nat inside source static 10.22.5.5 209.10.248.x % 209.10.248.x already mapped (10.22.5.4 - 209.10.248.x) -- This is what i am trying to acheive. ip nat inside source static 10.22.5.4 209.10.248.134 ip nat inside source static 10.22.5.5 209.10.248.134 (want to add this entry) Thanks in Advance! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62313t=62313 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: NAT QUESTION [7:62313]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Does not work. Pls state the tcp port you want map per internal ip As in (off the top of m hat) ip nat inside source static tcp 10.22.5.4 25 209.10.248.134 25 ip nat inside source static tcp 10.22.5.5 80 209.10.248.134 80 Can also use interface ethernet1 or dialer1 as in ip nat inside source static tcp 10.22.5.4 25 interface dialer1 25 Ofcourse introduced after somewhere 11.2??? Martijn - -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Namens Router Kid Verzonden: zaterdag 1 februari 2003 15:47 Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Onderwerp: NAT QUESTION [7:62313] Please can someone tell me if multiple Private Static IPs can be NAT'ed to one Public IP address. when i try to did that it gave me an error Router(config)#ip nat inside source static 10.22.5.5 209.10.248.x % 209.10.248.x already mapped (10.22.5.4 - 209.10.248.x) - -- This is what i am trying to acheive. ip nat inside source static 10.22.5.4 209.10.248.134 ip nat inside source static 10.22.5.5 209.10.248.134 (want to add this entry) Thanks in Advance! Version: PGP 8.0 iQA/AwUBPjvvE3dq56XWk+VyEQIltgCeO+LWICqQGRAqYS0ZADucixLEURMAoKvo 0pzzIySMB3sPOly/XK+nwhB2 =u8LN -END PGP SIGNATURE- Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62314t=62313 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IRB Routing IP and Bridging IPX [7:62303]
Firesox wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Folks I am a little stuck in IRB config. I have two 2620 routers connected via T1. I would llike to route IP and bridge IPX. On the routed IP network I need to run OSPF to connect to other networks. first of all, just to correct a misunderstanding, IRB ( integrated routing and bridging ) refers to bridging a given protocol on some interfaces and routing that same protocol on others. to bridge IPX and separately route IP is pretty fundamental. you could complicate it by creating a tunnel, and bridging, say, ipx over the tunnel. but pretty much you can do things on th physical interface just by following the instructions in the docs found on CCO. the one gotcha might be to remember to remove IP from the bridge group for example bridge 1 protocol ieee bridge 1 no bridge ip interface X bridge group 1 ip addr x.x.x.x y.y.y.y etc ip will not be bridged, but IPX ( and any other L2 protocol ) will be bridged. also note that on a bridged interface, no ipx configuration is required. I am looking for a sample config to do this, but cannot find it a good one at Cisco site. Thanks a million in advance Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62315t=62303 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: CCIE or a masters degree? [7:62287]
Oh well, If I ever get working I'll post the config's and an explanation. wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... sorry, i dont know mate :( not my strong point dude! -Original Message- From: Sam Sneed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 31 January 2003 21:55 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: CCIE or a masters degree? [7:62287] I was wondering, should I go for. haha fooled you. If it takes trickery to get this question answered so be it. don't take this post the wrong way... I have a 3600 router that current supports PPTP win2K clients using win2K client. I do not wnat to use Cisco client for VPN. What I am trying to do is authenticate using digital certificates. The Cert server is Win2K certificate server. I used a MS machine as VPN server with certificates and it works. I now need to get the Cisco router to do the same. Currently VPN users connecting to 3640 router and are authenticated via IAS using domain logons and it works fine this way. Has anyone implemented this? The router has certificate and it all looks OK. I'm not sure how to configure the router to use digital certificates to authenticate the users instead of username/password. When I try to login I get verifying username and password and then error 619 : the specifoed port is not connected. Here is config: aaa new-model aaa authentication login default group tacacs+ local line none aaa authentication ppp default group radius aaa authorization network default group radius none enable secret 5 $1$2MGM$ttPEfWBYGVf.Hc78TEuwn0 vpdn enable ! vpdn-group 1 ! Default PPTP VPDN group accept-dialin protocol pptp virtual-template 1 ! vpdn-group 2 ! ! crypto ca identity mscert enrollment mode ra enrollment url http://99.17.4.20:80/certsrv/mscep/mscep.dll crypto ca certificate chain mscert certificate 61285CC90004 ... ... 1CAC37AB 61BDC6 quit certificate ra-sign 6144F5320002 .. quit certificate ra-encrypt 6144F7EF0003 . . certificate ca 1B36F87430D2D4AC47DC9C0E1C4D9320 interface Virtual-Template1 ip unnumbered FastEthernet0/0 ip nat inside ip mroute-cache no keepalive peer default ip address pool vpn ppp encrypt mppe 128 required ppp authentication ms-chap ppp timeout authentication 5 ! ip local pool vpn 123.17.10.31 123.17.10.254 . For more information about Barclays Capital, please visit our web site at http://www.barcap.com. Internet communications are not secure and therefore the Barclays Group does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message. Although the Barclays Group operates anti-virus programmes, it does not accept responsibility for any damage whatsoever that is caused by viruses being passed. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the Barclays Group. Replies to this email may be monitored by the Barclays Group for operational or business reasons. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62316t=62287 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Redistributing Rip routes into ISIS - AD?? [7:62317]
Hello, Just stumbled upon this on Rip to Isis redistribution? If the source protocol's AD is higher than that of IS-IS, then the originating routes may be over-ridden by the new IS-IS route leading to flapping routes and/or incorrect next-hop addresses What does this actually mean? Does it mean the if netw. 4.0.0.0/8 (lo0 ip=4.4.4.4/24) is being originated by Rip v1 on R1 and passed to R2 running Rip and IS-IS, then when Rip is redistributed into IS-IS on R2, R2 applies it's AD of 115 on this route and passes it upstream to other L-1 and L-2 routers. How would this lead to a flapping route or an unreachable next-hop address? I just cannot seem to find a good example of this on CCO. Does any one have any suggestions on how to clarify this? (This looks like a very likey lab question) !! Thank you. Sincerely, CN Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62317t=62317 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: MAC Address [7:62251]
Larry Letterman wrote: In most cases you will only re-write the source mac address when traversing across a L3 device. If you go across a layer 2 network, all the mac address's would typically be part of the same broadcast domain and not need to be changed. If you go across a T1 or Frame it will still be mapped to or have an assigned IP Address that constitutes a layer 3 hop and write its mac address in the frame. A serial interface doesn't have a MAC address and the protocols used across a serial link don't have MAC addresses in their headers. If I misunderstood your point, just let me know. I'm sure you will! :-) Prisiclla However if I am wrong here, Priscilla or Howard or Chuck will let me know...:) Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems - Original Message - From: Cisco Newbie To: Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 11:42 AM Subject: RE: MAC Address [7:62251] First, thanks for all that responded. One clarification that I need address is the following: If I cross a L3 router and the outgoing interface is something other than Ethernet, will the L2 frame show a new MAC address? In other words, if my outgoing interface is say T1 PPP or even a dial-up, should I be seeing a new MAC address? Is it only when I cross a L3 device AND my outgoing interface is a share medium like Ethernet that a new MAC address will be placed on the frame? Thanks. - Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62318t=62251 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: In a pix or router, can you nat the Source IP based on dest [7:62319]
To add to this... The pix would operate under these conditions too. But it is absolutely not supported by Cisco and anyone doing it should consider the hurdles. First by having multiple interfaces facing the target IP network(global Internet). Then by setting routes to the chosen destinations IP prefixes(remote network) to egress the pix on an interface with different NAT pool. Then ensure that routing from the target IP network(global Internet again?) with source addresses of the remote networks enter the pix on the correct interface. I have used this in 5.x and 6.x for some very specific cases, though I am NOT recommending anyone do this. Just wanted to share knowledge that it is possible to make it work in a stable fashion on the PIX as well...of course every software upgrade has the potential to break this unintended(by Cisco) use. Darrell Newcomb http://www.netswitch.net Daniel Cotts wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... The following URL should be what you need for a router. pad Watch the wrap: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk648/tk361/technologies_tech_note09186a0080 093fca.shtml -Original Message- From: Robert Perez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 2:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: In a pix or router, can you nat the Source IP based on dest [7:62277] *** | Bob Perez | | Intercept Payment Solutions | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | 100 West Commons BLVD | | New Castle, DE 19720 | | Phone: 302.326.0700 | | Cell: 302.420.6883 | | www.intercept.net | | | -- | | || || | :|: :|: | | :|||: :|||: | | ..:|||:...:|||:.. | | ___ | | C i s c o S y s t e m s | | CCNA CCNP MCSE NET+ | | | *** Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62319t=62319 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Upgrade BootROMs [7:62321]
Hi Gruop, I want to upgrade my BootROMs for my 2500s routers. Is it easy to do? Any comments will be greatly appreciated. Best Regards, Hunt Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62321t=62321 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cisco Voice [7:62323]
Hello Group, Sorry for the un-related message:- Anyone has any Voice modules that they no longer needed? In particular, I am looking for:- 2 x NM1V 2 x NM-2FXS Regards, Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62323t=62323 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
bgp community [7:62326]
can someone help me? i am currently doing bgp in my test lab. i did a community no-advertise in one of the routes to be advertise by the local as to another as, but i can't see it in that other as. i also did a redistribution from bgp to igp (ospf) in the other as so that both bgp and igp would sync because one of the problems stated that i should not disable sync. did i missed something? here's my config in my test lab: router bgp 2 bgp log-neighbor-changes redistribute connected route-map loops neighbor 153.153.3.3 remote-as 3 neighbor 153.153.3.3 ebgp-multihop 255 neighbor 153.153.3.3 update-source Loopback10 neighbor 153.153.3.3 send-community route-map loops permit 10 match interface Loopback33 Loopback55 set origin igp ! route-map loops permit 20 match interface Loopback22 - loopback 22 is 22.22.22.22/24 set origin igp set community no-export when i did show ip bgp on the 153.153.3.3 router, Network Next HopMetric LocPrf Weight Path *i11.0.0.0 153.153.1.1 100 0 23 111 i * 33.0.0.0 153.153.6.6 1 0 2 i *i44.0.0.0 153.153.1.1 100 0 23 111 i * 55.0.0.0 153.153.6.6 1 0 2 i *i66.0.0.0 153.153.1.1 100 0 23 111 777 i *i77.0.0.0 153.153.1.1 100 0 23 111 444 555 i *i103.103.103.0/24 153.153.1.1 0100 0 23 i *i183.0.0.0/8 153.153.4.4 100 0 65003 i i can't see the 22.0.0.0 network. thanks in advance. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62326t=62326 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
