Re: Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 ISPs [7:71508]
""Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote in message ... > *sigh* you realize, I know, that we are talking about utterly > essential concepts in working in the ISP space, yet these are things > that don't show up on any Cisco test I'm aware of. This is part of > why an R&S CCIE isn't much initial use to a large ISP without a good > deal of OJT -- although they can probably deal with customer > connections. Actually, they do show up on Cisco tests that I'm aware of, but I doubt I can disclose the detail of that information, especially here. Also - I see it as the other way around... ISP's and whoever are still going to take CCIE's over people with actual ISP "OJT" or even 10+ years experience. Why? Because Cisco's a monopoly and just too dominant. Worldcom and Level-3 will never have such success. > >the problem is that everybody pays Sprint (at least according to > >Sprint), but the people who "might not pay Sprint, but shhh don't > >tell anyone" (aka AOL) probably pay Worldcom. > > Well, probably a couple more. Think of who actually runs substantial > national backbones of OC-48 or better. Sprint, AT&T, > Worldcom/UUNET/whatever name du jour. There are some other major > regional facility providers, including the Borgs...I mean, former > Baby Bells. Now, it's perfectly reasonable that a Tier 1 could > outsource the transmission, especially since they have the level of > clue to write enforceable physical diversity requirements. The physical diversity requirements are enough for an average MBA graduate to figure out how to finance dime a dozen. If you want to and can sell it, you'll find a way to get into it (but not necessarily out). Anybody can play with the big boys, especially if you have Warren Buffett (Level-3) or Carl Icahn (XO) behind your company. These people are also a dime a dozen in the high-end business world. > >Speaking of AOL, > >where do they fit? Tier 1, 2, or 3? They don't have enterprise IP > >transit customers... they aren't really a transit-AS but they > >are arguably larger than most ISP's that consider themselves > >Tier-1's. Same with MSN. > > I don't know that much about their internals, so I'm making an > educated guess here. My recollection is that they outsource > substantial parts of their transit requirements. They outsource plenty of their transit requirements... but they charge more than standard transit prices for their sub-1k routes. Explain this. > Frankly, I'd call them much closer to an ASP than an ISP. oh the blurry lines... this is very true ;> I very much agree with you on this point. > If you want to go this route, than we really need to introduce > categories beyond ISP. You have major access providers/broadband > aggregators/dial wholesalers. You have application service providers, > which blurs with content provider. For that matter, you have > wholesale content delivery providers like Akamai. Again, agreed. Unfortunately, many of the people driving business behind "the ISP indsutry" were previously using the "Voice" model and selling like a traditional telco. Clearly, the retail industry and especially energy/defense industries are way ahead of the telco industry selling/mktg/general business strategies and models. So it's another repeat of a sad story the ISP industry could end up just like the telco industry... or worse, the automotive or consulting industries. > >The most important provider for most business today is not any of > >the above types, surprisingly. It's the pen-ultimate Tier-1... > >the Exchange Point Provider. There has to be someplace where all > >these people meet to exchange traffic and connect with circuits... > >and in today's world... it's the Exchange Point. > > Yes and no. Now, most details are proprietary, but my impression is > that more pure bandwidth is exchanged between "high-level" provider > through direct private peering connections (private lines or > equivalents) than through exchange point fabrics. Confusing this And the cost of a 10/100 interface or two, or even sixty, is? > even further is the presence of private peerings both between the > cages/racks in an exchange point (a piece of fiber), and the less > visible private peerings that take place in the exchange point > building but not in the exchange point proper (i.e., fiber > connections down in the cable vault). Or cheap $20/month copper cross-connects. To everyone else in the facility. > There's a delicate economic balance whether bilateral/multilateral > peering at exchanges gives you enough routes, and also enough > economic fairness. Bill Norton has published rather extensively on > this topic, and presented at multiple NANOGs. Well it really comes down to returns... and the WACC/discount/ hurdle rates your company employs and how they measure when the company goes into big capital or operating expenditures. Unless you run your own business and can do whatever you want. There's always power in the normally powerless (Tier
RE: Needs some help [7:71491]
Hi, I think you have in place the foundation you need to begin looking for a job. I have no doubt about that. What I can say is that you be patient a littleI do not know how it is in the US, but in my country, a fresh graduate has to be patient actually. You have the right attitude towards the job market, and this is evident because apart from your degree program, you have also taken the certification programs. Okay, whereas these certification programs may not give one experience, they bring you much closer to understanding the kind of job you may have to be called upon to do. In short, I would say just be patient as you aggressively look for the job; it will come, though sometimes it may take several months :) Mwalie Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71592&t=71491 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Needs some help [7:71491]
Thanks David for your response. I have been applying for entry-level full time job. I am also interested in doing an internship. Thanks Azhar Soomro Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71589&t=71491 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Cisco frame-relay question [7:71500]
This command is used to to set the source DLCI for use when LMI is not supported. This command is mainly used for testing of frame-relay encapsulation when two servers are connected back to back. Thanks Azhar Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71591&t=71500 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How To block Yahoo Messanger [7:71593]
All How can i block yahoo messenger from the ip address which are not allowded to go to net. i put a access list and gave access to few ip address to go to net but still users which are outside of that range can still manage to use the yahoo messanger.Any ideas Rohit Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71593&t=71593 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: For Priscilla [7:71462]
Thanks for the eye-opener. I did not know that many of the errors one finds in technical books are introduced in the editorial process. Nor did I know that the publishers are not strong on things like diagrams and cover art. It sounds like I might do better working out the kinks in my Visio diagrams imported into Word, than relying on a publisher to be able to do a better job. I was thinking of using one of my nice-looking Visio diagrams as cover art, perhaps jazzing that one up with color. I don't care about getting an advance up front. If my book of CCIE lab advice and scenarios with detailed explanations (like Hutnik and Saterlee CCIE Lab Practice Kit) is of high quality, it will sell pretty well. The key, for me, is to make sure that it is of high quality. A few errors on crucial points can render an otherwise great technical book untrustworthy. I have caught some errors in my first three scenarios, and will probably find some in the next draft, too. The key to good writing is rewriting, I have been told. The only reason left for submitting a book to a big name publisher is to be able to say "I have a book published by Big Publisher, Inc." For someone without an established name or reputation, that is still something, but your post changes the whole cost/benefit analysis. I will have my hands full correcting my own mistakes, without having to fix the mistakes of editors. Thanks, Tom Larus, CCIE #10,014 Oppenheimer"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Black Jack wrote: > > > > That is very interesting. Can you give us a little more > > background about how your relationship with your publisher went > > so badly wrong? > > Sounds like I exaggerated a bit. :-) It didn't go that wrong. The publisher > says that the problems are all related to the economic downturn. I have my > doubts, though. > > Cisco Press is still doing well. Of course, they have that vendor name on > their books which helps I'm sure. > > People aren't buying books, supposedly. Are you? :-) Just wondering... > > > I for one know very little about how > > publisher-author deals work and would like to hear more, it > > it's not too painful to relate! > > I can't tell you about my specific deal, but I can explain the process a > little bit. > > A writer works with an acquisitions editor. An acquisitions editor is a > sales person with extremely good negotiation skills. He or she sells the > author on the idea of working with the publisher. He or she also works with > the publisher's legal department to produce a contract that has everything > in the pusblisher's favor: > > * No actual promises with regards to publishing, marketing or distributing > the book > > * Exclusive rights which means that even if they do an awful job, the author > can't use the content for anything else > > * Requirement that you give your next book to them too (I refuse to sign > that one, though) > > * Royalties that range a lot from publisher to publisher, anywhere from 8% > to 19% of the sale on each book, based on the price that the publisher gives > to the book reseller, which is much lower than the price that the reader pays > > * Gazillions of exceptions to the royalties, with a lower rate for > internatainal sales, online sales, etc. etc. > > * An advance on the royalties, ranging from $1000 to $15,000 for a really > good publisher (this is one of the good things they do :-) > > Of course, as with everything, the author gets what he or she negotiates, > but a lot of us aren't very good negotiators. That's why many authors work > with an agent. > > Oh, and did I mention that you shouldn't expect the publisher to do a good > job with the things that you think of when you think "publisher" including > editing, figure drawing (they insist on redrawing the figures), copy for the > back of the book, copy for Amazon and other marketing materials. Many of > them do an awful job with these tasks. Look at all the mistakes in the > books. In most cases they weren't introduced by the author. The author is > supposed to catch them with the "page proofs" but that's much harder than it > sounds, and sometimes the errors get introduced after the page proofs. > > Just the other day I was reading a really good book about voice. The author > said something about the DSPs in Cisco routers that do the analog-to-digital > conversion and other tasks. DSP was spelled out as "domain specific part." > An editor at work. > > I had an editor who tried to change "powers of two" to "groups of two?" An > editor working in the computer industry didn't understand the powers of > two!? And that is par for the course. > > Now, I do have to say that the editors of Top-Down Network Design did a > great job. The only mistakes that really drive me nuts are in the index, > which they didn't have me proof. I hate the fact that they spelled on LFN as > long filename in the index, when the page that uses the acronym uses it to > refer to Long Fat Networks. And they put "top-do
Re: CCIE Program will be migrating to IOS 12.2 From July 7 2003 [7:71595]
""Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > At 2:50 AM + 6/28/03, Hemingway wrote: > Is that Ernest, Margot, or Mariel? which would yoiu prefer? :-> > > >for those using some mix of 26xx routers in their study labs, one can now > >get the "enterprise basic" IOS load, which includes such things as IS-IS, > >BGP, MPLS, CEF, but none of the obsolte crap such as Apollo and Banyan > >(still has DEC and DLSw, which I guess will never go away) > > > >an interesting find on the feature set is that VRRP is now supported. Look > >for that to be tested the first few weeks of the revised labs. betcha :-> > > > >Cisco seems to like the "T" trains for some reason, so I've heard. > > Is migrating really the right word? Birds migrate south (in the > Northern hemisphere), but then fly back in the spring. throughout history, populations have migrated, and it's been more or less one way. > > > > > > > > >""Alex"" wrote in message > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Yes they will, you can download them from Cisco's web site but you need > to > >> have a CCO account. > >> > >> Alex > >> ""Ashok C Braganza"" wrote in message > >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > Can someone tell me, if the following Routers will support Cisco IOS > >12.2? > >> > and where i can find these IOS. > >> > > >> > 2501 (16D/16F)(2S,1E) > >> > 2503 (16D/16F)(2S,1E,1ISDN) > >> > 2511 (16D/16F)(2S,1E,16Asyn) > >> > 2522 (16D/16F)(10S,1E,1ISDN) > >> > > >> > Thanks > >> > > >> > A. Braganza Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71595&t=71595 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: How To block Yahoo Messanger [7:71593]
this kind of topic comes up regularly, and I gotta keep asking - why do you think you need to block a service that employees are using? OK, so the boss thinks employees are screwing around all day chatting with their friends. so the answer is simple. remove internet access for everyone. the boss writes and enforces an acceptable use policy. then for those identified employees who really do need to get to the net, permit them on a one by one basis. of course that means static ip, or removing the dns references from your dhcp scopes. ""Rohit Sundriyal"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > All > > How can i block yahoo messenger from the ip address which are not allowded > to go to net. > i put a access list and gave access to few ip address to go to net but still > users which are outside of that range can still manage to use the yahoo > messanger.Any ideas > > > Rohit Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71594&t=71593 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Practice tests....Good, Bad, Ethical? [7:71505]
Hi David: These sort of tests will only be helpful after you thoroughly study the whole material. The tests that I like are transcenders because they are extremely good and the questions on these tests are of good quality.So these study guides or braindumps are just last min preparation , so that you can glance at them before taking the exam. I hope this helps. Thanks Azhar Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71590&t=71505 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Channel Bonding [7:71519]
Im Probably wrong here but my understanding is that multi-link groups multiple channels into a singel entity for lack of a better term.For instance with ISDN if you use multi-link I believe it brings both B channels up when interesting traffic is forwarded. My understanding of bonding is that you use it to form multiple circuits into a single entity.I have seen bonding used with T-1s and the bonded circuits appear to be a single pipe. Im probably worng on countless levels but since noone else took a stab at it I figured what the hell. :P HTH Don K. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71599&t=71519 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 ISPs [7:71508]
>"dre" wrote, >""Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote in message ... >> *sigh* you realize, I know, that we are talking about utterly >> essential concepts in working in the ISP space, yet these are things >> that don't show up on any Cisco test I'm aware of. This is part of >> why an R&S CCIE isn't much initial use to a large ISP without a good >> deal of OJT -- although they can probably deal with customer >> connections. > >Actually, they do show up on Cisco tests that I'm aware of, but I doubt >I can disclose the detail of that information, especially here. > >Also - I see it as the other way around... ISP's and whoever are still >going to take CCIE's over people with actual ISP "OJT" or even 10+ >years experience. Why? Because Cisco's a monopoly and just too >dominant. Worldcom and Level-3 will never have such success. I do remember a discussion at a NANOG meeting, however, where one of the senior people drew the analogy between (R) behind a name on a professional sports roster [rookie, for the non-USAians] and (CCIE). I'll grant that a CCIE can be useful quickly in doing things like customer BGP setup, once the Cisco idiocy about no static/default routes has been beaten out of them with an oversized clue stick. The kind of things I was considering, _some_ of which might be in C&S, but a lot of which I suspect would be considered more "design", could include: -- what grades of service do you offer? -- what communities do you set up for your customers and peers? what external communities do you accept? Do you use Geoff Huston's NOPEER? -- what's your strategy for customers multihomed to several of your sites but not to another ISP? RFC 2270? What's the role of NAT? -- to what extent do you run BGP (or more likely, what level of routes do you leak into) your maximum-bandwidth core, especially if it's (G)MPLS? Should the core know anything other than how to find next hops, with the intelligence of AS exits being in the distribution tier? For that matter, do you use best exit, closest exit, or a hybrid? What's your definition of "best"? -- if your local competition is selling based on lower hop count on their T-1's when you have three OC-3 hops, can you swallow your pride and common sense and tunnel so you show one hop? Or can you recognize your market position is such that you don't need to indulge in such idiocy? -- what's the longest NO-EXPORT prefix you will accept from customers? What will you export of other prefixes received, perhaps differentiating between customer and non-customer origin AS? -- How do you set up sanity checks? What should be the prefix limit? Rate limit on UPDATEs? Do you generate filters from a routing registry? Do you use strict or loose uRPF? Do you trust any peers? -- How do you deal with an attack where you want to get detailed traces, but you can't afford to do this in your core routers? UUNet presented an approach at NANOG to use a "shadow network" to which suspicious traffic can be transparently diverted, with detailed accounting, etc. > >> >the problem is that everybody pays Sprint (at least according to >> >Sprint), but the people who "might not pay Sprint, but shhh don't >> >tell anyone" (aka AOL) probably pay Worldcom. >> >> Well, probably a couple more. Think of who actually runs substantial >> national backbones of OC-48 or better. Sprint, AT&T, >> Worldcom/UUNET/whatever name du jour. There are some other major >> regional facility providers, including the Borgs...I mean, former >> Baby Bells. Now, it's perfectly reasonable that a Tier 1 could >> outsource the transmission, especially since they have the level of >> clue to write enforceable physical diversity requirements. > >The physical diversity requirements are enough for an average MBA >graduate to figure out how to finance dime a dozen. If you want to >and can sell it, you'll find a way to get into it (but not necessarily out). Fair enough, especially since the FCC came down hard on MCI for claiming to have sold diversity when it actually hadn't, even though there was no connectivity loss. Still, to what extent does Cisco teach the implications of automated grooming and the auditing of data layout record cards? > >Anybody can play with the big boys, especially if you have Warren >Buffett (Level-3) or Carl Icahn (XO) behind your company. These >people are also a dime a dozen in the high-end business world. The economics still aren't trivial. Bill Norton has probably explored this to the greatest extent -- what is the strategic business model of encouraging peering versus finding the last possible way to sell transit? Remember, peering also means that the big guy may learn routes he might not learn from s
Re: For Priscilla [7:71462]
At 3:27 PM + 6/28/03, Thomas Larus wrote: >Thanks for the eye-opener. I did not know that many of the errors one finds >in technical books are introduced in the editorial process. There were two reasons I switched from Macmillan (deceased sister of Cisco Press, but using lots of Cisco Press conventions) to Wiley: lack of marketing (far less true of Cisco Press), and their insistence on using a "development editor". Development editors are _not_ copy editors, but conceptually have the role of "helping poor techies write and express themselves." Well, some of us poor techies already can write -- indeed, some of us have been editors. I found her to be a constant obstacle. For example, she kept insisting, even when three peer reviewers also told her she was wrong, that a "two order of magnitude" increase meant doubling, not going up by 10 to the power 2. Now, there are other people that liked their development editor and found it a useful process. It's really a very individual thing, and one size does not fit all. What works for me is to have a strong technical colleague as reader and sounding board (Scott Bradner for the WAN Survival Guide, and Annlee Hines for Building Service Provider Networks). For the second book, I finally found an editor that added to the process, Stephanie Landis. Officially, Stephanie was the copy editor, but went slightly beyond that to the point I needed -- tell me something doesn't flow, but don't try to fix it. Wherever possible, I have CertZone contract with Stephanie to edit my papers, but also have a technical reviewer. Cisco Press has gotten more reasonable over time, or it may be that I know enough people and have enough track record that I might be willing to do another book with them. At least in the present economy, though, professional web self-publishing may be a viable option. That doesn't mean I won't use editors, graphics people, etc., but they will be people I know will add to the process. Self-publishing also simplifies the update/errata process. >Nor did I know >that the publishers are not strong on things like diagrams and cover art. >It sounds like I might do better working out the kinks in my Visio diagrams >imported into Word, than relying on a publisher to be able to do a better >job. I was thinking of using one of my nice-looking Visio diagrams as cover >art, perhaps jazzing that one up with color. I haven't found a publisher that really redraws -- they do things, instead, such as standardize line widths, page alignment, etc. There have been a few times where I would have liked to work with a graphics professional to work out a very hard drawing with which I wasn't getting the results that I wanted, but, in general, this is something that has to be contracted on a case-by-case basis. The publisher graphics people get involved, typically, only with the finished manuscript. I don't know if there is an industry standard for drawing, although the people I've talked to tend to use Adobe Illustrator. All the publishers I know use Quark for page layout, which has interesting ripple effects on what you can and can't do in Word. > >I don't care about getting an advance up front. If my book of CCIE lab >advice and scenarios with detailed explanations (like Hutnik and Saterlee >CCIE Lab Practice Kit) is of high quality, it will sell pretty well. The >key, for me, is to make sure that it is of high quality. A few errors on >crucial points can render an otherwise great technical book untrustworthy. >I have caught some errors in my first three scenarios, and will probably >find some in the next draft, too. The key to good writing is rewriting, I >have been told. > >The only reason left for submitting a book to a big name publisher is to be >able to say "I have a book published by Big Publisher, Inc." For someone >without an established name or reputation, that is still something, but your >post changes the whole cost/benefit analysis. I will have my hands full >correcting my own mistakes, without having to fix the mistakes of editors. > >Thanks, >Tom Larus, CCIE #10,014 > > > >Oppenheimer"" wrote in message >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Black Jack wrote: >> > >> > That is very interesting. Can you give us a little more >> > background about how your relationship with your publisher went >> > so badly wrong? >> >> Sounds like I exaggerated a bit. :-) It didn't go that wrong. The >publisher >> says that the problems are all related to the economic downturn. I have my >> doubts, though. >> >> Cisco Press is still doing well. Of course, they have that vendor name on >> their books which helps I'm sure. >> >> People aren't buying books, supposedly. Are you? :-) Just wondering... >> >> > I for one know very little about how >> > publisher-author deals work and would like to hear more, it >> > it's not too painful to relate! >> >> I can't tell you about my specific deal, but I can explain the process a >>
Computer receiving packets which are connected to Cisco Switch [7:71600]
I have a strange problem; all my Microsoft XP Professional operating system client computers are sending and receiving packets continues (Ethernet Adapter light blinks continues) which are connected to Cisco switch, but if I connect to normal hub or 3com switch, it stops, I checked with sniffer, it says spanning tree, and it shows Cisco IOS details. This problem is only in XP other Microsoft operating system like Win98, ME etc, doesn't send or received any packets. Can someoe help me, what could be the problem Thanks A. Braganza Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71600&t=71600 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Can anyone tell what "ITM" means?! [7:71601]
I have read Routing and Switching Written Exam (350-001)Study Suggestions. This item is on the list---"ITM from the Cisco Connection Training CD (DOC-CCTCD) Order ITM online".will U tell me the mean of "ITM"?Thank you very much!!! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71601&t=71601 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Channel Bonding [7:71519]
At 5:23 PM + 6/28/03, Don Kanicki wrote: >Im Probably wrong here but my understanding is that multi-link groups >multiple channels into a singel entity for lack of a better term.For >instance with ISDN if you use multi-link I believe it brings both B channels >up when interesting traffic is forwarded. >My understanding of bonding is that you use it to form multiple circuits >into a single entity.I have seen bonding used with T-1s and the bonded >circuits appear to be a single pipe. Sort of a nit, but Cisco doesn't support BONDING (yes, it is a very contrived acronym that happily escapes me). Bonding is a layer 1 bit-interleaving technique invented primarily for videoconferencing using six B channels or modem equivalents. Bonding is fairly low overhead, but has undesirable characteristics for data transmission. Cisco does support an assortment of layer 2 multilink techniques that give the impression of a single pipe: LAPB, X.25, PPP, Etherchannel and 802.3a, and probably something I've forgotten. 802.17/RPR sort of multilinks, as do some MPLS shared risk group recovery methods. There's also L2TP multilinking. > > > >Im probably worng on countless levels but since noone else took a stab at it >I figured what the hell. :P > >HTH >Don K. > Good try. I'm glad you took the shot. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71603&t=71519 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: For Priscilla [7:71462]
Re drawings: When I published my book with Wiley, they wanted the drawings as separate files, either in native Quark or Visio .vsd -- they would take PowerPoint .ppt but with the understanding that they would have them redrawn/reworked. Re self-publishing: I do think that's the way to go -- faster to the public, easier to correct when mistakes do creep in (and they do -- we all change something and then miss one or two of the ripple effects). And with web publishing, you can include color drawings, which are immensely clearer than those limited to gray-scale. The one drawback, and it's a big one for most technical authors, is marketing -- we aren't good at it. Solve that, and we have a possible revolution in *timely* and *high-quality* material for people to learn from. Annlee Howard C. Berkowitz wrote: > At 3:27 PM + 6/28/03, Thomas Larus wrote: > >>Thanks for the eye-opener. I did not know that many of the errors one finds >>in technical books are introduced in the editorial process. > > > There were two reasons I switched from Macmillan (deceased sister of > Cisco Press, but using lots of Cisco Press conventions) to Wiley: > lack of marketing (far less true of Cisco Press), and their > insistence on using a "development editor". Development editors are > _not_ copy editors, but conceptually have the role of "helping poor > techies write and express themselves." Well, some of us poor techies > already can write -- indeed, some of us have been editors. I found > her to be a constant obstacle. For example, she kept insisting, even > when three peer reviewers also told her she was wrong, that a "two > order of magnitude" increase meant doubling, not going up by 10 to > the power 2. > > Now, there are other people that liked their development editor and > found it a useful process. It's really a very individual thing, and > one size does not fit all. What works for me is to have a strong > technical colleague as reader and sounding board (Scott Bradner for > the WAN Survival Guide, and Annlee Hines for Building Service > Provider Networks). For the second book, I finally found an editor > that added to the process, Stephanie Landis. Officially, Stephanie > was the copy editor, but went slightly beyond that to the point I > needed -- tell me something doesn't flow, but don't try to fix it. > Wherever possible, I have CertZone contract with Stephanie to edit my > papers, but also have a technical reviewer. > > Cisco Press has gotten more reasonable over time, or it may be that I > know enough people and have enough track record that I might be > willing to do another book with them. At least in the present > economy, though, professional web self-publishing may be a viable > option. That doesn't mean I won't use editors, graphics people, > etc., but they will be people I know will add to the process. > Self-publishing also simplifies the update/errata process. > > >>Nor did I know >>that the publishers are not strong on things like diagrams and cover art. >>It sounds like I might do better working out the kinks in my Visio diagrams >>imported into Word, than relying on a publisher to be able to do a better >>job. I was thinking of using one of my nice-looking Visio diagrams as cover >>art, perhaps jazzing that one up with color. > > > I haven't found a publisher that really redraws -- they do things, > instead, such as standardize line widths, page alignment, etc. There > have been a few times where I would have liked to work with a > graphics professional to work out a very hard drawing with which I > wasn't getting the results that I wanted, but, in general, this is > something that has to be contracted on a case-by-case basis. The > publisher graphics people get involved, typically, only with the > finished manuscript. > > I don't know if there is an industry standard for drawing, although > the people I've talked to tend to use Adobe Illustrator. All the > publishers I know use Quark for page layout, which has interesting > ripple effects on what you can and can't do in Word. > > >>I don't care about getting an advance up front. If my book of CCIE lab >>advice and scenarios with detailed explanations (like Hutnik and Saterlee >>CCIE Lab Practice Kit) is of high quality, it will sell pretty well. The >>key, for me, is to make sure that it is of high quality. A few errors on >>crucial points can render an otherwise great technical book untrustworthy. >>I have caught some errors in my first three scenarios, and will probably >>find some in the next draft, too. The key to good writing is rewriting, I >>have been told. >> >>The only reason left for submitting a book to a big name publisher is to be >>able to say "I have a book published by Big Publisher, Inc." For someone >>without an established name or reputation, that is still something, but your >>post changes the whole cost/benefit analysis. I will have my hands full >>correctin
RE: Channel Bonding [7:71519]
IIRC, channel bonding is a sort of Multi-link PPP thing with the obvious overhead. Check out inverse multiplexing as well - Have a look on CCO for IMA (agin this also has an overhead. Best regards, Dom Stocqueler SysDom Technologies Visit our website - www.sysdom.org -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 28 June 2003 18:24 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Channel Bonding [7:71519] Im Probably wrong here but my understanding is that multi-link groups multiple channels into a singel entity for lack of a better term.For instance with ISDN if you use multi-link I believe it brings both B channels up when interesting traffic is forwarded. My understanding of bonding is that you use it to form multiple circuits into a single entity.I have seen bonding used with T-1s and the bonded circuits appear to be a single pipe. Im probably worng on countless levels but since noone else took a stab at it I figured what the hell. :P HTH Don K. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71604&t=71519 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Any Recommendation for CCIE R/S Lab Workbook [7:71605]
Has anyone used "Bosons CCIE Detailed Skills Lab Book"? Is it a decent material to study for CCIE lab or there are better ones? Thanks. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71605&t=71605 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EIGRP Load Balancing ??'s [7:71607]
Group, I have a customer that has two locations connected via 2-Full point-to-point T1's. The customer has a 1720 at each location. The customer is using EIGRP to load balance the two locations. The networks at each location show in the routing tables with the same administrative distance. Everything is fine up to this point. However, when I look at the traffic statistics for each of the T1's, the first T1 has significantly higher utilization. My research has led me to believe the reason that traffic isn't spread more evenly over the T1's is due to the way the 1720's switch the traffic. It's my understanding that by default the 1720's use per-destination load balancing in the type of scenario my customer has. Since only one network is at each location this would explain the utilization issues. The solution appears to be for the customer to implement per packet load balancing. Am I correct on my points so far ?? If I implement per packet load-balancing for the customer, is the command to do this no ip route-cache ?? If yes, on what interface do I place the command, if not what are the command or commands and how are they implemented ?? One of the warnings I've read about concerning per packet load-balancing is that low end routers like the 1720 may not be able to handle, should I be concerned about the 1720's ?? The customer has a pair of 2621's we could use in place of the 1720's. Bottomline, the customer would like to load balance the two locations via the two T1's move evenly, am I proceeding the right direction ?? If not, what recommendations would others offer. Thanks in advance. Stephen Manuel Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71607&t=71607 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP Multicast [7:71577]
I understande how Multicast routers should not forward any multicast datagram with destination addresses in this range (224.0.0.0 - 224.0.0.255 ) bec. of ttl not able the address to go to the next hop. But I dont' remember how those addresses are translated to L2 addresses. Or maybe I'm not reading into it...or the link local terminology is throwing me off. Thanks all for you answers. rbx10Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71609&t=71577 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: EIGRP Load Balancing ??'s [7:71607]
Hi, if you are running CEF (generally a good idea), then per-packet load balancing can be turned on with the command 'ip load-sharing per-packet'. You have to configure this on the outgoing interfaces (if I remember correctly). Note however that per-destination load balancing means only that packets for a given source-destination host pair take the same path, so if you have more than one host on any side of the network and traffic is more or less evenly distributed among them, then it should work even with per-destination load balancing (which is the default setting if you use CEF). The command 'no ip route-cache' turns off fast switching, which would also result in per-packet load balancing but also in a performance hit. I think this is what you have heard about. I don't think per-packet load balancing with CEF will decrease performance. Thanks, Zsombor At 11:58 PM 6/28/2003 +, Stephen Manuel wrote: >Group, > > > >I have a customer that has two locations connected via 2-Full >point-to-point T1's. > > > >The customer has a 1720 at each location. > > > >The customer is using EIGRP to load balance the two locations. > > > >The networks at each location show in the routing tables with the same >administrative distance. > > > >Everything is fine up to this point. > > > >However, when I look at the traffic statistics for each of the T1's, the >first T1 has significantly higher utilization. > > > >My research has led me to believe the reason that traffic isn't spread >more evenly over the T1's is due to the way the 1720's switch the >traffic. > > > >It's my understanding that by default the 1720's use per-destination >load balancing in the type of scenario my customer has. > > > >Since only one network is at each location this would explain the >utilization issues. > > > >The solution appears to be for the customer to implement per packet load >balancing. > > > >Am I correct on my points so far ?? > > > >If I implement per packet load-balancing for the customer, is the >command to do this no ip route-cache ?? > > > >If yes, on what interface do I place the command, if not what are the >command or commands and how are they implemented ?? > > > >One of the warnings I've read about concerning per packet load-balancing >is that low end routers like the 1720 may not be able to handle, should >I be concerned about the 1720's ?? > >The customer has a pair of 2621's we could use in place of the 1720's. > > > >Bottomline, the customer would like to load balance the two locations >via the two T1's move evenly, am I proceeding the right direction ?? > > > >If not, what recommendations would others offer. > > > >Thanks in advance. > > > >Stephen Manuel Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71610&t=71607 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP Multicast [7:71577]
I understande how Multicast routers should not forward any multicast datagram with destination addresses in this range (224.0.0.0 - 224.0.0.255 ) bec. of ttl not able the address to go to the next hop. But I dont' remember how those addresses are translated to L2 addresses. Or maybe I'm not reading into it...or the link local terminology is throwing me off. Thanks all for you answers. rbx10Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: > > rbx10 Defcom wrote: > > > > Hi everyone, > > I was wondering if someone can explain to me what is > > "Link-Local to L3 to L2 mapping" under Cisco R&S Blue print > > under In the IP Multicast Section. > > My guess is that you don't have the phrase quite right. :-) > It's probably "link local L3-to-L2 mapping" and simply means > the normal method that you probably already know to translate a > multicast IP address to a MAC address. > > Try this URL: > > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/ito_doc/ipmulti.htm > > Link-local means the address is only used locally. It's used > for packets that have a TTL of 1. IPv6 has such a concept and I > think the term came from there, but I don't think Cisco is > referring to IPv6 here. > > IANA, the gods of all Internet related numbers, has subdivided > the IP multicast address space. More here at the IANA site: > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/multicast-addresses > > 224.0.0.0 - 224.0.0.255 (224.0.0/24) is the Local Network > Control Block and I think that's what Cisco is referring to. > It's reserved for the use of routing protocols and other > low-level > topology discovery or maintenance protocols. Multicast routers > should not forward any multicast datagram with destination > addresses in this range > > So, do you know how those addresses are translated to L2 > addresses? It's not anything you haven't heard before, > especially if you studied for the Switching exam. At least as > far as I know, the translation isn't any different for these > just because Cisco calls them "link local." Hopefuly somebody > will correct me if I'm wrong, though. > > Priscilla > > > > > > > > > I read Jeff Doyle II on IP Multicasting and other materials on > > IP Multicast but I can't seem to depict that concept. Could > > someone point me in the direction ? > > > > Thanks for all your help. > > > > RBX10- > > TAKING THE TEST NEXT WEEK !!! :-) > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=71608&t=71577 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
