DLSW+ Problem [7:2599]
Hi I am having some performance problem with DLSW+. The peers are 2621 with IOS Version 12.0(3)T3 and at the other end I have Cisco 2612 with version 11.3(9)T. Our testing setup with obviously less load worked fine but when we moved to production the sessions started dropping. I have checked circuit load and it looks fine. Probably some DLSW+ parametes with some timing features or problem with IOS is causing this problem. Or may be its related to 2600 routers. Is there anyone who experienced same kinda issues in past. Any comments. Thanks... Peter _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=2599&t=2599 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [sc] DLSW+ Problem [7:2616]
I am not having problem with DLSW+ connectivity. THe peers are up but I am seeing session drops from application perspective. On the routers I don't see sny connectivity problem or problems with DLSW+. >From application point-of-view my user sees SNA communication and SNA SYSTEM RESOURCE FAILURE messages. Thanks.. Fawad From: "Qurashi, Iftikhar" To: "'Fawad Alam'" Subject: RE: [sc] DLSW+ Problem Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:14:37 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from [159.231.69.23] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBCB7120E00784004314F9FE745179B760; Mon Apr 30 13:11:58 2001 Received: from cbmrd-xscc001im.scc.intria.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])by unixs09.scc.intria.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f3UKCJS22386for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:12:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: by CBMRD-XSCC001IM with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)id ; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:10:08 -0400 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Apr 30 13:13:36 2001 Message-ID: Return-Receipt-To: "Qurashi, Iftikhar" X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Dear Fawad, I am also working on exactly same scenario where I have 2621 on one end and 2612 on other end. let me know more about your scenario and may be I can help you somehow in this regard Iftikhar. -Original Message- From: Fawad Alam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 2:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [sc] DLSW+ Problem Hi I am having some performance problem with DLSW+. The peers are 2621 with IOS Version 12.0(3)T3 and at the other end I have Cisco 2612 with version 11.3(9)T. Our testing setup with obviously less load worked fine but when we moved to production the sessions started dropping. I have checked circuit load and it looks fine. Probably some DLSW+ parametes with some timing features or problem with IOS is causing this problem. Or may be its related to 2600 routers. Is there anyone who experienced same kinda issues in past. Any comments. Thanks... Peter _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. -- To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe cisco-cert | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=2616&t=2616 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [sc] DLSW+ Problem [7:2627]
Yes, we are going from one topology to another. This is from TR to Ethernet. From: "Chris Cell" Reply-To: "Chris Cell" To: Subject: RE: [sc] DLSW+ Problem Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:49:36 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from [24.0.95.141] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBCB71C01004D400438CE18005F8DC6C80; Mon Apr 30 13:54:25 2001 Received: from CC55451A ([24.180.204.240]) by femail14.sdc1.sfba.home.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.20 201-229-121-120-20010223) with SMTP id for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 13:54:11 -0700 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Apr 30 13:55:54 2001 Message-ID: X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 I've seen mtu size cause app problems like that. Are you going from one topology to another on the local area sides (enet to tr for example)? If so, then I would look at it from that angle. Chris I am not having problem with DLSW+ connectivity. THe peers are up but I am seeing session drops from application perspective. On the routers I don't see sny connectivity problem or problems with DLSW+. >From application point-of-view my user sees SNA communication and SNA SYSTEM RESOURCE FAILURE messages. Thanks.. Fawad From: "Qurashi, Iftikhar" To: "'Fawad Alam'" Subject: RE: [sc] DLSW+ Problem Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:14:37 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from [159.231.69.23] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id MHotMailBCB7120E00784004314F9FE745179B760; Mon Apr 30 13:11:58 2001 Received: from cbmrd-xscc001im.scc.intria.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])by unixs09.scc.intria.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f3UKCJS22386for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:12:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: by CBMRD-XSCC001IM with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)id ; Mon, 30 Apr 2001 16:10:08 -0400 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Apr 30 13:13:36 2001 Message-ID: Return-Receipt-To: "Qurashi, Iftikhar" X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Dear Fawad, I am also working on exactly same scenario where I have 2621 on one end and 2612 on other end. let me know more about your scenario and may be I can help you somehow in this regard Iftikhar. -Original Message- From: Fawad Alam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 2:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [sc] DLSW+ Problem Hi I am having some performance problem with DLSW+. The peers are 2621 with IOS Version 12.0(3)T3 and at the other end I have Cisco 2612 with version 11.3(9)T. Our testing setup with obviously less load worked fine but when we moved to production the sessions started dropping. I have checked circuit load and it looks fine. Probably some DLSW+ parametes with some timing features or problem with IOS is causing this problem. Or may be its related to 2600 routers. Is there anyone who experienced same kinda issues in past. Any comments. Thanks... Peter _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. -- To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe cisco-cert | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. -- To unsubscribe: echo unsubscribe cisco-cert | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=2627&t=2627 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fwd: RE: [sc] DLSW+ Problem [7:2627]
Yes, we are going from one topology to another. This is from TR to Ethernet. From: "Chris Cell" Reply-To: "Chris Cell" >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Apr 30 13:55:54 2001 Message-ID: I've seen mtu size cause app problems like that. Are you going from one topology to another on the local area sides (enet to tr for example)? If so, then I would look at it from that angle. Chris I am not having problem with DLSW+ connectivity. THe peers are up but I am seeing session drops from application perspective. On the routers I don't see sny connectivity problem or problems with DLSW+. >From application point-of-view my user sees SNA communication and SNA SYSTEM RESOURCE FAILURE messages. Thanks.. Fawad From: "Qurashi, Iftikhar" To: "'Fawad Alam'" Return-Receipt-To: "Qurashi, Iftikhar" X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Dear Fawad, I am also working on exactly same scenario where I have 2621 on one end and 2612 on other end. let me know more about your scenario and may be I can help you somehow in this regard Iftikhar. -Original Message- From: Fawad Alam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 2:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [sc] DLSW+ Problem Hi I am having some performance problem with DLSW+. The peers are 2621 with IOS Version 12.0(3)T3 and at the other end I have Cisco 2612 with version 11.3(9)T. Our testing setup with obviously less load worked fine but when we moved to production the sessions started dropping. I have checked circuit load and it looks fine. Probably some DLSW+ parametes with some timing features or problem with IOS is causing this problem. Or may be its related to 2600 routers. Is there anyone who experienced same kinda issues in past. Any comments. Thanks... _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=2658&t=2627 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PIX Firewall extended access list [7:3367]
I was configuring extended ACL on PIX firewall Ver 5.2.1 and started observing that the access-list is not working properly. Later on I realized that it is different from extended access list of the routers. I couldn't get the philosophy behind that. Any comments! _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=3367&t=3367 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flash Upgrde problem on Cisco 2600 [7:5001]
In order to increase flash on my 2600 Router I ordered 16MB Kingston Flash. I removed the original 8 MB flash and inserted this new 16MB flash and the message I am getting is: rommon 1 > boot device does not contain a valid magic number boot: cannot open "flash:" boot: cannot determine first file name on device "flash:" What should I do for the router to recognize this new flash?? Thanks... _ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=5001&t=5001 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PIX Firewall -------- Replacement Strategy [7:17951]
We have a PIX failover bundle. Our Primary PIX failed and we powered it off. Now we have another PIX and we have to connect it. What should be the strategy so that no outage occurs. I think if we put the new PIX (without any Config) to the Primary end of Failover cable it would be the Active and would sync all its config to the second box (that would be a disaster) Please suggest the steps we should follow??? Much Appreciated _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=17951&t=17951 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fwd: PIX Firewall -------- Replacement Strategy [7:17951]
We have a PIX failover bundle. Our Primary PIX failed and we powered it off. Now we have another PIX and we have to connect it. What should be the strategy so that no outage occurs. I think if we put the new PIX (without any Config) to the Primary end of Failover cable it would be the Active and would sync all its config to the second box (that would be a disaster) Please suggest the steps we should follow??? Much Appreciated _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=17972&t=17951 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
