7206 VXR config
Has anyone ever used the RJ-45 port on the I/O controller on a 7206 to actually pass traffic? I'm worried that because it sits on a card that has other functions that I won't get the needed performance from that port. Or that I won't be able to use that port for for passing in-band traffic at all. So my decision is wavering between getting a 2-port FE LAN adapter or a 1-port FE LAN adapter and using the RJ-45 port on the I/O controller. Any ideas? Jim _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 7206 VXR config
I called an old project manager friend of mine at Cisco and found out that the RJ-45 interface on the I/O controller works just like any other FE connection that can be added to the router. That interface has a direct connection to the backplane and does not share any resources with the other components on that card. Jim Circusnuts wrote: > This would work, but you're right... it's usually the out of band management > connection. > > Phil > - Original Message - > From: "Jim Healis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Newsgroups: groupstudy.cisco > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 9:18 PM > Subject: 7206 VXR config > > >> Has anyone ever used the RJ-45 port on the I/O controller on a 7206 to >> actually pass traffic? >> I'm worried that because it sits on a card that has other functions that >> I won't get the needed performance from that port. Or that I won't be >> able to use that port for for passing in-band traffic at all. >> >> So my decision is wavering between getting a 2-port FE LAN adapter or a >> 1-port FE LAN adapter and using the RJ-45 port on the I/O controller. >> >> Any ideas? >> >> Jim >> >> _ >> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > >> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: HSRP configuration
What about physical port failure? Or cable failure (i.e. gets yanked out by an idiot)? That's the kind of failure I was thinking of when I mentioned the single point. Brant Stevens wrote: > Why not use an etherchannel connection for the isl link between the > switches. this would eliminate the single point of failure > > Brant I. Stevens > Internetwork Solutions Engineer > Thrupoint, Inc. > 545 Fifth Avenue, 14th Floor > New York, NY. 10017 > 646-562-6540 > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Jim Healis > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 2:21 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: HSRP configuration > > > For those that have used HSRP in your networks for redundant external > connections, how have you dealt with the "single point of failure" issue > when you have two routers, two switches and using ISL to run HSRP > between them? > > I have two 7206VXR routers, two Cat 6509 switches. My current drawing > shows using the ISL uplinks from the switches to the routers and the ISL > link between the two switches to pass HSRP heartbeat. But I figure that > if the ISL link between the switches ever drops, then I have lost the > heartbeat and I have two active routers trying to be active HSRP. > > I thought about using MHSRP, and having two separate groups for the two > separate switches the routers are connected to, but I still run into > that hearbeat thing again. > > The last thought that I had was to run two ethernet segments from each > router to each switch. That would give the needed redundancy, but it > would cost so much. > > Any ideas? > > Jim > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
HSRP configuration
For those that have used HSRP in your networks for redundant external connections, how have you dealt with the "single point of failure" issue when you have two routers, two switches and using ISL to run HSRP between them? I have two 7206VXR routers, two Cat 6509 switches. My current drawing shows using the ISL uplinks from the switches to the routers and the ISL link between the two switches to pass HSRP heartbeat. But I figure that if the ISL link between the switches ever drops, then I have lost the heartbeat and I have two active routers trying to be active HSRP. I thought about using MHSRP, and having two separate groups for the two separate switches the routers are connected to, but I still run into that hearbeat thing again. The last thought that I had was to run two ethernet segments from each router to each switch. That would give the needed redundancy, but it would cost so much. Any ideas? Jim _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: HSRP configuration
So, you are thinking of using multiple ports for the connection between the switches? That was my last refuge as well. I was looking to see if anyone had implemented anything else, and how it turned out for them. Brant Stevens wrote: > A trunked EtherChannel link would cover those problems... > > Brant I. Stevens > Internetwork Solutions Engineer > Thrupoint, Inc. > 545 Fifth Avenue, 14th Floor > New York, NY. 10017 > 646-562-6540 > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > Jim Healis > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 3:47 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: HSRP configuration > > > What about physical port failure? Or cable failure (i.e. gets yanked > out by an idiot)? > That's the kind of failure I was thinking of when I mentioned the single > point. > > Brant Stevens wrote: > > >> Why not use an etherchannel connection for the isl link between the >> switches. this would eliminate the single point of failure >> >> Brant I. Stevens >> Internetwork Solutions Engineer >> Thrupoint, Inc. >> 545 Fifth Avenue, 14th Floor >> New York, NY. 10017 >> 646-562-6540 >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >> Jim Healis >> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 2:21 PM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: HSRP configuration >> >> >> For those that have used HSRP in your networks for redundant external >> connections, how have you dealt with the "single point of failure" issue >> when you have two routers, two switches and using ISL to run HSRP >> between them? >> >> I have two 7206VXR routers, two Cat 6509 switches. My current drawing >> shows using the ISL uplinks from the switches to the routers and the ISL >> link between the two switches to pass HSRP heartbeat. But I figure that >> if the ISL link between the switches ever drops, then I have lost the >> heartbeat and I have two active routers trying to be active HSRP. >> >> I thought about using MHSRP, and having two separate groups for the two >> separate switches the routers are connected to, but I still run into >> that hearbeat thing again. >> >> The last thought that I had was to run two ethernet segments from each >> router to each switch. That would give the needed redundancy, but it >> would cost so much. >> >> Any ideas? >> >> Jim >> >> _ >> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html >> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> _ >> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > >> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: case studies using PPP authentication
Some examples that come to mind: DDR links - these should have authentication so no unauthorized access is obtained. Out-of-band management - a modem connected to a console/aux port (though not recommended) Session authentication for ISP users - ISP users with dialup or PPPoE Randy Mueller wrote: > I've been doing a lot of reading on PPP these past few days, and while I think I >have a semi-decent understanding of how it works, I don't quite understand why PPP >authentication would be configured. > > Can somebody provide some insight into a practical use, maybe point me to some case >studies or other links? > > It's my understanding that it is primarily used on dial-up links, and that makes >sense. But under what circumstances would it come into use? > > Maybe somebody could just send me an example of it's use? > > Thanks in advance for any assistance. > Randy > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CCIEs in Utah
Does anyone here know of, or actually is, a CCIE in Utah? I'm looking to do a little "networking" in Utah. Please contact me by direct email if you have any information. Thanks! Jim _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Study sanity
I'm interested in hearing remedies for those times when you have read so much, and keep rereading material because it's repeated in every book, that you feel a little dizzy, a bit disoriented, and ready to throw the books out the window. Let's hear what everyone has done, especially those CCIEs! -j _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Frame Relay problem
Your telco provisioned the PVC on the same circuit as DLCI 17, this is evident by the show frame-relay pvc command. You have it configured on Serial 0, which is why it shows up, down. But it is actually on Serial 1. Try configuring the sub-interface on Serial 1, and I bet it comes up and starts running. -j Subject: Frame Relay - Real Life Problem Date: 30 Nov 2000 00:16:34 -0500 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adele Galus) Organization: GroupStudy.com Discussion Groups Newsgroups: groupstudy.cisco This is a configuration problem. Situation: I have two ISP's involved. The router is a 2500 series. Internal CSU/DSU. On DLCI 17 ISP traffic routes. The other DLCI 16 doesn't. Information is correct - I must be missing something. Cormick#show frame-relay map Serial0.16 (down): point-to-point dlci, dlci 16(0x10,0x400), broadcast status deleted Serial1.1 (up): point-to-point dlci, dlci 17(0x11,0x410), broadcast, IETF status defined, active Cormick#show frame-relay pvc PVC Statistics for interface Serial0 (Frame Relay DTE) DLCI = 16, DLCI USAGE = LOCAL, PVC STATUS = DELETED, INTERFACE = Serial0.16 input pkts 0 output pkts 4in bytes 0 out bytes 1794 dropped pkts 0 in FECN pkts 0 in BECN pkts 0 out FECN pkts 0 out BECN pkts 0 in DE pkts 0 out DE pkts 0 out bcast pkts 4 out bcast bytes 1794 pvc create time 9w3d, last time pvc status changed 7w4d PVC Statistics for interface Serial1 (Frame Relay DTE) DLCI = 16, DLCI USAGE = UNUSED, PVC STATUS = INACTIVE, INTERFACE = Serial1 input pkts 0 output pkts 0in bytes 0 out bytes 0 dropped pkts 0 in FECN pkts 0 in BECN pkts 0 out FECN pkts 0 out BECN pkts 0 in DE pkts 0 out DE pkts 0 out bcast pkts 0 out bcast bytes 0Num Pkts Switched 0 pvc create time 9w3d, last time pvc status changed 7w4d DLCI = 17, DLCI USAGE = LOCAL, PVC STATUS = ACTIVE, INTERFACE = Serial1.1 input pkts 73176244 output pkts 63755322 in bytes 2986909822 out bytes 4214766293 dropped pkts 239 in FECN pkts 273970 in BECN pkts 254655 out FECN pkts 0 out BECN pkts 0 in DE pkts 940978out DE pkts 0 out bcast pkts 96267 out bcast bytes 27724896 pvc create time 9w3d, last time pvc status changed 7w4d Cormick#show interfaces Ethernet0 is up, line protocol is up Hardware is Lance, address is 0010.7b3a.3a4e (bia 0010.7b3a.3a4e) Internet address is 63.200.119.158/28 MTU 1500 bytes, BW 1 Kbit, DLY 1000 usec, rely 255/255, load 2/255 Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set, keepalive set (10 sec) ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00 Last input 00:00:00, output 00:00:00, output hang never Last clearing of "show interface" counters never Queueing strategy: fifo Output queue 0/40, 0 drops; input queue 3/75, 210 drops 5 minute input rate 18000 bits/sec, 24 packets/sec 5 minute output rate 113000 bits/sec, 24 packets/sec 64042206 packets input, 881888058 bytes, 16 no buffer Received 365077 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 210 throttles 13798 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 13798 ignored, 0 abort 0 input packets with dribble condition detected 73886303 packets output, 3838898715 bytes, 0 underruns 0 output errors, 46341 collisions, 430 interface resets 0 babbles, 0 late collision, 105851 deferred 0 lost carrier, 0 no carrier 0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out Serial0 is up, line protocol is down Hardware is HD64570 with FT1 CSU/DSU MTU 1500 bytes, BW 1544 Kbit, DLY 2 usec, rely 255/255, load 1/255 Encapsulation FRAME-RELAY IETF, loopback not set, keepalive set (10 sec) LMI enq sent 578802, LMI stat recvd 0, LMI upd recvd 0, DTE LMI down LMI enq recvd 0, LMI stat sent 0, LMI upd sent 0 LMI DLCI 0 LMI type is ANSI Annex D frame relay DTE Broadcast queue 0/64, broadcasts sent/dropped 4/0, interface broadcasts 2 Last input never, output 00:00:04, output hang never Last clearing of "show interface" counters never Queueing strategy: fifo Output queue 0/40, 0 drops; input queue 0/75, 0 drops 5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec 5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec 0 packets input, 0 bytes, 0 no buffer Received 0 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles 5210 input errors, 52 CRC, 2 frame, 3 overrun, 320 ignored, 11 abort 578805 packets output, 8105008 bytes, 0 underruns 0 output errors, 0 collisions, 192612 interface resets
Passed MCNS 2.0
Well, I made it under the wire... I passed the MCNS exam this morning with an 848. I know... not the best score to have, but it's good for me since I have always been terrible at test taking. I now have the CCNP - Security specialization. However, I still intend to take the other exams that are required after January 1st. What's the worst that can happen? For those that will ask: I used the IOS 12.0 Network Security book, the Designing Network Security book (though this helped the least for the exam), the PIX documentation from CCO, and the Boson Practice exams (saved my butt!). I spent the last 4-5 days studying, but I also have hands on experience with configuring PIX and router-to-router VPNs (so I lacked heavily on AAA and NAS). Now on to the CVOICE exam... This one I have to do, because I lost out on a new job yesterday because I didn't know SS7 well enough! Good luck to everyone on your exams! -j _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Okay everyone... I need some advice.
I have heard this before, but my poor brain needs reassurance. I have completed the CCDP and CCNP Security, and I am thinking about doing VoIP next week. My plan is to take the CCIE R&S written next month. But now, as I stare the registration site in the pixels, I think that I should go right ahead with the CCIE R&S written without taking the VoIP exam. My intention on taking the VoIP exam is to have an intermediate step before takling the CCIE exam. But I am wavering... my confidense is shaking... For those that are thinking: "How can I know what to tell him? I know nothign about him." Let me tell you a bit about myself. I pick up things naturally. I studied for a week for the Security exam and passed with an 848. I took the FRS exam, instead of three exams, for the CCNP and passed that with an 830 after two weeks of study. I admit that I am not perfect in my scores, but a pass is a pass. It does reflect in my available knowledge: I have much bredth but not as much depth as I would like to have. So, with all that being said, what advice do all of you have for me? Be gentle. :-) Jim _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Okay everyone... I need some advice
Sorry for the bad spelling... I was typing while watching television, and pressed send before I realized I forgot to check my work. Jim _ 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 #891
I've passed my CCNP, but I would be happy to help out others who are pursuing it. I live near the SJC airport. Let me know... Jim michael liu wrote: > Hi, Guys: > > Is there any CCNP study groups in Cupertino, San Jose area? > > Thanks, > > Michael Liu > > _ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Yet another CCNP/ MCNS tips?
>From my experience with this exam just a week ago, this is what you should know: Know your PIX commands. Know all the crypto commands. Know the debug outputs on the PIX and IOS firewall features. Know all types of all the PIX models and their features. Know all requirements to run the IOS firewall features. Best of luck to you. Jim EDiT wrote: > Well, I wanted to thank everyone who posts info about their study habits and > materials. Thanks to you all I finished my CCNP today. > > Now for the question: Anyone have feed back on the MCNS? I am scheduled next > week, and know a lot of the general concepts(I've been doing security for a > while), but I am a bit rusty on specifics(PIX commands, etc). Any comments > on the break-up of the test as far as content is concerned? > > Eric D. Thiel > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: When do we have to use subinterface on FR config?
Not always. You should only have to use subinterfaces for point-to-point FR connections. Otherwise you can use on interface for many connections... point-to-multipoint. We used this in my last company, but it made my head spin everytime the IXC changed the mapping. -j Flem wrote: > Always. > > flem > > --- frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks > > > > frank > > > > > > _ > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. > http://shopping.yahoo.com/ > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CCIE practice exams
Well, at one time I thought that I was knowledgeable. I wouldn't say that about myself tonight. I started taking the Boson practice exams for the CCIE written, and I am realizing just how much I don't know. I have been consistently getting 50-52%. It's like I have hit a plateau in my knowledge. I will say, however, that what I do know is in direct line with the kind of work I have been doing for the past 3 years. Well, I guess I didn't have much of a point to this message... just to take up space, and let people know where I am at in my studies for those that don't care, please refrain from criticism. Thanks! -j _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Boson CCIE written
Well, after a frightening first time of taking the practice exam and only getting 51%, I spent some time reading up on the areas that I lacked and I am now getting a solid 85% score. I plan on spending a bit more time reading in areas I need only small improvement on, but from the looks of it I think I will be able to pass the written exam in a couple weeks. Wish me luck! -j _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Boson CCIE written
Well, after a frightening first time of taking the practice exam and only getting 51%, I spent some time reading up on the areas that I lacked and I am now getting a solid 85% score. I plan on spending a bit more time reading in areas I need only small improvement on, but from the looks of it I think I will be able to pass the written exam in a couple weeks. Wish me luck! -j _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: So what SHOULD a CCIE know?
I feel that a CCIE should know everything in his technology specialty (i.e. routed global networks with enterprise switching) like he ate it for breakfast. For everything else a CCIE should have a general knowledge and know exactly how and where to find more information on the subject. About the tests: I think they are good, though they could be a bit more in depth (maybe more questions on certain topics). When I took the written the first time I came out of it with a headache and a clear path of what I needed to work on. I'm glad to see that they are retiring some of the older protocols, but for those that work strictly in the IP area it can be a burden to learn things we have never touched and don't work with. -j Chuck Larrieu wrote: > We've all seen a number of comments about the CCIE written and the CCIE Lab, > regarding content. Most of those comments have been negative. > > So, what SHOULD be tested? What SHOULD a CCIE know? > > Anyone? > > Chuck > -- > I am Locutus, a CCIE Lab Proctor. Xx_Brain_dumps_xX are futile. Your life as > it has been is over ( if you hope to pass ) From this time forward, you will > study US! > ( apologies to the folks at Star Trek TNG ) > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: can SPAN port transmit?
Yeah, you're correct. A second port is needed for the probe to send data to a network management system. I have tried this a few times using Sniffer Pro. You cannot put data on the network over the SPAN port, it is only intended for listening to the configured ports. -j Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: > Hi folks, > > If I connect a Sniffer-like device to the SPAN port of a switch, will the > Sniffer-like device be able to transmit data? > > My guess is no. From my reading on Cisco's SwitchProbe external hardware > probes, it appears that the SwitchProbe needs an additional port to send > data to a network management system. One port connects to a SPAN port on > the switch and the other port connects to a normal port and is configured > in "management mode." > > But, does anyone have experience with trying to send from a device > connected to a SPAN port? > > Thanks > > Priscilla > > > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > http://www.priscilla.com > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
OT - ASN Request
Has anyone here completed the ARIN ASN request form? If you have I could use a little assistance in completing the justification portion. I would prefer not to bang my head against the wall while trying to reinvent the wheel. Please reply via private email. Thanks! -j _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Frame Relay Security
Once, while working at a very popular network auction web site, I ran into a security advisor that said Frame Relay was not secure and we should not allow critical information to pass over those connections. The VP of Technology, at the time, said "we have more important things to worry about than someone spending hours on end trying to hack a Frame Switch just to see if our traffic happens to be on it". Just thought I would add that little tidbit to the conversation. -j Chuck Larrieu wrote: > Jim, just to be contrary, how can a single provider, or even multiple > provider frame clouds be compromised as easily as internet traffic? > > What are some of the specifics of danger of compromise of any private > network versus the internet? > > Those bad people can't, for example, do DDoS attacks against your private > network, except via the internet connection. It is that same internet > connection that is the source of major compromises of corporate networks > nationwide. > > What are some of the specific security issues you see on private networks, > as compared to public networks? > > Chuck > Just being contrary, in the hopes of learning something :-> > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Jim > Brown > Sent: Monday, January 08, 2001 8:47 AM > To: 'Brian Lodwick'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Frame Relay Security > > > There should not be different levels of encryption for traffic depending on > whether its frame or Internet transient. Your traffic is open to compromise > on the Internet or in a providers frame cloud. From a security viewpoint > neither one is more secure than the other. > > It really boils down to acceptable risk vs. cost. > > Just remember, you can never eliminate risk. There are always holes in your > security. > > Any individual who is asking themselves should I use DES/3DES on a frame > connection should stop and look to see if they have a modem bank behind > their firewall. > > Your security is only a strong as the weakest link. > > -Original Message- > From: Brian Lodwick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 8:35 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Frame Relay Security > > > Group, > Which then I believe should obviously lead into the discussion- if VPN's > are today's PVC's then would it be appropriate to say that traffic > transported over the public internet with such a protocol as IPSec is just > as safe? and how do you know your enemies aren't working for that frame > provider -if they are using single DES they had better hope not. Are there > protocols now capable of providing enough security encryption for extremely > sensitive traffic to transit the public internet? > > Brian >>> > >> From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: Frame Relay Security >> Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 13:37:09 -0500 >> >> >>> I understand most of the benefits of frame relay, but I am wondering if = >>> there are any security problems assoicated with this protocol? Is it = >>> secure enough for unencrypted transfer of financial or sensitive = >>> information? Any help understanding the security risks associated with = >>> frame relay appreciated. >>> >>> -- Kevin >> >> Is a dedicated line secure enough for unencrypted transfer of >> financial or sensitive information? >> >> Answer: It depends. >> >> People often assume that frame is somehow shared when "dedicated >> lines" are not. From Chapter 5 of my _WAN Survival Guide_, >> >> >>> All too many users have an intuitive belief that if they were to >>> pull on the London end of a London to New York circuit, wires would >>> wiggle in Manhattan. The reality, of course, is that any network of >>> complexity beyond a very simple LAN involves one or more layers of >>> virtualization onto real media. At the OSI lower layers, >>> virtualization usually involves multiplexing, but various name and >>> address mapping functions provide virtual structure as one moves up >>> the protocol stack. >> >> Typically, frame PVCs and T1's run over exactly the same media from >> the customer site to the telco end office. Once at the end office, >> they are multiplexed. T1 is far too slow for economical data >> transmission between modern telco offices. Both the T1 and the frame >> circuits typically will be multiplexed onto facilities at least at >> DS-3, and usually OC-12 to OC-192. So much beyond the local loop, >> there really isn't much difference between frame and dedicated. >> >> Interpretations in the US HIPAA legislation for medical data tend to >> allow unencrypted traffic to flow over dedicated and frame, but not >> the public Internet. The Federal Reserve, however, tends to want >> end-to-end encryption regardless of the media, historically single >> DES. Military traffic would be bulk encrypted and possibly >>
Re: CCIE Written Detail
I think that for those who have spent weeks reading high level stuff that the Exam Cram book is something good to review the week before your written exam. It has a good, brief, coverage of the minimal essentials and may help in reminding you about some of the basic things you have forgotten while getting too intimate with BGP. :-) -j mikey wrote: > The Exam Cram will not give you enough to pass the written. It is not a bad > book and will give you some supplemental info. > What is needed to pass written has been posted quite a bit by those sho have > passed, my advice is to read and heed the info that has already been posted. > > I don't think there is a quick cram method to ccie. > > mikey > > > Eric Gunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > >> Hello, >> >> I was wondering if anyone that has read the CCIE Exam Cram though that was >> sufficient in detail to pass the CCIE written exam? I have been through > > and > >> passed the CCNP+Security track, so I was hoping that some review would be >> enough to prepare. However the exam cram seems a bit general, just looking >> for opinions from people that have been through a similar track. >> >> I also plan on using the studyguide from www.cramsession.com, along with >> Boson practice test #1. I had great luck with the Boson test for the >> security exam which is that same author that does the CCIE Boson tests. >> >> Thank you for the input, >> >> -Eric Gunn >> >> CCNP + Security, MCSE, CCA.CNA, N+ >> >> _ >> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > >> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CCIE written, 2nd try
Well, in just about 12 hours I take the CCIE written exam for the second time. The first time was just to get a handle on what I should expect (though I still held hope that I would pass). This time, however, I have made a strong effort to study. In the last four weeks I have read more material, page for page, than I did all through college. I still can't say that I know it all because sometimes I still draw a blank when someone asks me a question. But I can say that when I took that first Certification Zone practice exam I thought I was nuts for thinking I could do this, and when I took the most recent one I actually made a passing score. And now, on the eve of my exam, I think to myself if I am still crazy for continuing this path. I mean, thinking about all that I must study in addition to what I have already done makes me dizzy. But just for giggles I thought I would see how fast I could correctly configure a router, from scratch, with two Ethernet connections, two WAN connections, a routing protocol and NAT. Now I know this is a simple configuration but I was going for speed not complexity. I finished configuring the router in just under 9 minutes, and yes, it worked! I was shocked. I didn't think I was that practiced. So now I study a bit more, just to cover the basic items that I may have forgotten in my studies. I also plan on getting a good night's sleep (though I may be too nervous). And tomorrow morning I plan on passing the exam and greeting my future with open arms and a confident smirk on my face. :-) Best wishes to all! Jim _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CCIE Written, 2nd try
Well... much to my disappointment I did not pass the written exam again. Though my improvement is great. The first time I took the exam, right after completing the CCNP, I got a miserable 51%. This time I got 68%, a lousy 2 questions short of a passing score. Looking at the sections of the exam I note that the areas I did weak in the first time are areas I excelled in this time, but at the expense of lacking in areas where I formerly did well. For those that will ask: Use the Boson exams and read EVERY white paper at Certification Zone. I plan on taking the exam again next week, after another week of studying the areas in which I lacked. Hopefully this time I won't be sacrificing one knowledge for another. Thanks to all who wished me luck! Jim _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Follow up - CCIE Written 2nd try
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit As I sit here pondering why the Raiders lost to the Ravens I have been going over the areas that I lacked in on my last attempt at the CCIE written exam. With each chapter that I read, and each sample configuration that I peruse I find myself getting bored. In my mind I tell myself, "I know this stuff why am I going over it again?" "I should have passed this time." One email, from Chuck Larreiu, really made me think about what I was doing. I had psyched myself out on the exam. I had studied so hard in areas that I perceived were weak that I sacrificed areas that I was strong because I was confident that I didn't need to study those areas again. And now, as I go over those areas I had felt confident in, I realize that I actually knew everything I needed in the first place, but that I let myself read more into the exam questions than was actually there. I find it very easy to read more into these questions that is really needed. I have tried to avoid this by reading the end of the question first, where they usually ask for what the are looking for, and then go back and read the question over again. So, now I am trying to push myself through these chapters gleaning as many little details out of them as possible. It's difficult because since high school I have always been terrible at repetitive learning, causing me trouble throughout structured learning institutions. So let me round off the end of this post with a couple quick comments: I just purchased the second edition of Caslow's book. I like the additions to it, but the Index still lacks in areas that I enjoy. I prefer to have a book as reference and use the Index to find sections that I want to read. I have probably gained the best information from the white papers that I have read form Certification Zone. They have provided the information I want to read about in a very attractive way. Easy to read, and from very respectable sources. If you actually made it this far, then thank you for reading. My next try is scheduled for Thursday morning. Jim _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Error Message
From CCO: Error Message %AMDP2_FE-5-LATECOLL: AMDP2/FE([dec]/[dec]), Late collision Explanation Late collisions occurred on the Ethernet/Fast Ethernet interface. Recommended Action If the interface is Fast Ethernet, verify that both peers are in the same duplex mode. For regular Ethernet, the system should recover. No action is required. Kelly D Griffin wrote: > Does anyone know what causes this error message? > > Jan 17 16:32:35 CDT: %AMDP2_FE-5-LATECOLL: Ethernet0/1 transmit error > > Kelly D Griffin, CCNA > Network Engineer > Kg2 Network Design > http://www.kg2.com > > > > > http://1cis.com > Free E-mail Servers with unlimited mailboxes > 1st Class Internet Solutions > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Whew... I passed
Well, I did it. I passed the CCIE written exam this morning. And, for just a moment, I felt the weight of the world lift off my shoulders. Then I thought about the lab exam and what I need to do to get there. Thankfully, I have a plan; it just needs to be put on paper so it can be a working document. I have posted much in the recent weeks about how I have studied to get this far, so I won't post it again. But if you have specific questions about certain areas, that won't violate the NDA, I will be happy to answer them. Now, my next challenge comes along... not the lab... convincing my boss that the company should pay for the lab exam and any needed materials for getting there. I know that I shouldn't rely on this as the means to the end; but if I can get it, why not? Anyone have any pointers on how to convince a VP that doesn't know much about the CCIE program that he should approve these things? Thanks for the wonderful humor and study tips! Jim _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Tacacs+
I think I can answer the first couple questions. If the user authentication fails to the first server the second server will NOT be contacted. The reason for a second server is if the first server fails to respond to an authentication request. A third server can even be configured, and it is wise to use the 'local' setting at the end of that command, unless you do not want any access while all the authentication servers are not responding. Last, I am almost positive that authentication has to happen first. Jim Eric Gunn wrote: > If more than 1 tacacs server is defined in a config what would happen if > > The user dosen't authenticate, it will NOT contact the second server correct? > > The only reason to have a second server assigned is if the first one is not > responding, in which case the config would allow for use of the second server. > > Also Authentication must take place before anything can happen. > > I know I some of these questions are basic, I just want to verify and see > if I am misunderstanding something. > > > Thanks, > > --Eric > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Whew... I passed
My thoughts were this: If I pay for everything myself, then the employer should be ready to provide a pay raise immediately, up to $120k. If they pay for everything (lab attempts, classes, lab equipment that I get to keep), then I can see staying on for an additional 6 months at the current pay rate. This would make up for the money laid out for everything, considering the pay raise for me would be about $30k. But, quite frankly, I don't see any company laying out cash like that for equipment that they aren't going to use. And negotiating a raise like that seems very difficult. Jim Dennis Laganiere wrote: > I'm ready to get spammed for this, but here are some thoughts from the other > side of management. > > If YOU paid for your own training, lab equipment, and lab attempts (probably > multiple, at $1,000 piece) then I could see your asking for a huge raise. > > HOWEVER, if the company paid for your training, bought $15,000 to $20,000 > worth of lab equipment for you to play with, and gave you the time to study, > + lab attempts, +travel expenses+ god-knows-what-else, I think you owe > something back, and perhaps some time served at your current rate is the > least they could expect in return. > > If they support you through the whole process and you either leave or start > barking for the stars salary-wise, the guy next to you, who's six months > behind you on the same career path, won't get the price of honey for his > tea. > > Again, these are just my $.02 > > > --- Dennis > > -Original Message- > From: ItsMe > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 1/18/01 6:39 PM > Subject: Re: Whew... I passed > > Convincing the VP isn't the hard part, its after you pass explaining to > the > VP > that a $20K/year raise is warranted. Which in turn he says your are > nuts, > so you decide to leave... until he breaks out the agreement that says in > fine print that you have agreed to pay back all training funds it you > leave... > Be careful! > > "Jim Healis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > DF49A3EC4130D411AC1600508B608DDF01116426@DIALPAD-EX2">news:DF49A3EC4130D411AC1600508B608DDF01116426@DIALPAD-EX2... > >> Well, I did it. I passed the CCIE written exam this morning. And, for > > just > >> a moment, I felt the weight of the world lift off my shoulders. Then > > I > >> thought about the lab exam and what I need to do to get there. > > Thankfully, > >> I have a plan; it just needs to be put on paper so it can be a working >> document. >> I have posted much in the recent weeks about how I have studied to get > > this > >> far, so I won't post it again. But if you have specific questions > > about > >> certain areas, that won't violate the NDA, I will be happy to answer > > them. > >> Now, my next challenge comes along... not the lab... convincing my > > boss > that > >> the company should pay for the lab exam and any needed materials for > > getting > >> there. I know that I shouldn't rely on this as the means to the end; > > but > if > >> I can get it, why not? Anyone have any pointers on how to convince a > > VP > >> that doesn't know much about the CCIE program that he should approve > > these > >> things? >> Thanks for the wonderful humor and study tips! >> >> Jim >> >> >> _ >> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > >> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > > > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Remote Telnet access via dial-up
Nearly every time I have dealt with TAC they have asked if there was remote access so they could get into the routers and look around on their own. After a couple times of doing this I started configuring separate logins and one-time passwords just for TAC, and only when needed. Granted this doesn't stop the clear text mode of Telnet, but with the combination of encrypted passwords I think it was adequate for what that company was trying to secure. Jim Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: > At 07:32 PM 1/18/01, Erick B. wrote: > >> I don't understand how companys can have main network >> equipment (routers, etc) accessible over the internet >> with telnet (and other mgmt services) running *with* >> no passwords or filters. I see it on a regular >> occurance. > > > That is amazing. But in this case the company had a lot of security, it > sounds like. It was not possible to get into the routers until this guy > opened up a backdoor and let Cisco engineers Telnet in over a dial-up line > connected to his PC. I can't believe Cisco engineers would thwart their > customer's security policy in that way. I think the story sounds fishy. > > Priscilla > > > >> --- Priscilla Oppenheimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> At 10:31 PM 1/17/01, J Roysdon wrote: >>> Today I was a site w/o internet access, but I >>> >>> needed to get Cisco into it to >>> save time relaying commands and information. I had >>> >>> a dial-up connection out >>> to my ISP, and then thought about the built-in >>> >>> Telnet server that Windows >>> 2000 Professional has. I made a quick guest >>> >>> account for Cisco, and told >>> them my dial-up IP, which they could connect to, >>> >>> and then once telnetted >>> into my workstation, they were able to telnet out >>> >>> my NIC to the routers they >>> needs to get to. Only catch is that you can only >>> >>> have one session up >>> through it (enough for us): >>> >>> Good thing! Can you imagine the issues if you had >>> just opened up port 23 >>> for the whole world? Good grief. >>> >>> I just asked a security expert at my company about >>> this scenario and he >>> took a sinister view. He wondered if the story was >>> broadcast in order to >>> incite damange. I don't think that's the case, but >>> this message did come >>> from the same guy that posted photographs of his >>> site for some reason. See >>> the message about patch panels. >>> >>> Priscilla >> >> >> __ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. >> http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > http://www.priscilla.com > > _ > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Business proposal for CCIE lab
I would love to hear comments on the proposal I am planning to _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Business Proposal for CCIE lab
I would appreciate hearing feedback from others on the proposal I am planning to present to the VP of my department for the plan of paying for my studying for the CCIE lab. Anyone interested in helping me, contact me off-list. Thanks! Jim _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: VLANs and SC0!
Just a couple questions that popped into mind: What is your addressing for the sc0 interface on the Cat5500? Are you trying to ping by IP address or name? Jim Cristina Hoselins wrote: > All, > > This is a stupid question: > I have recently run into some information that has caused me to doubt > the way a switch works. > > SITUATION: > R1(E0)--(2/6)Cat5500(2/7)--(e0)R2 > A catalyst 5500 (no RSM) with 2 VLAN's configured: Vlan 1, Vlan 2,and 2 > routers, both routers configured for VLAN 1 with 24 bit subnet mask, SC0 is > part of VLAN1 > by default > R1 pings R2 OK > R2 pings R1 OK > Cat5500 pings both routers OK > SO far so good... > Now I moved 2/6 and 2/7 to VLAN 2, set the vtp domain name XY and try to > ping > R1 pings R2 OK > R2 pings R1 OK > Cat5500 cannot ping the routers,neither the routers can ping the Cat5500.. > when you do a SH CDP NEIGH it sees both routers, SCO is still in VLAN1...I > moved SC0 into VLAN 2, doesn't make a difference... DOes anybody know why > > It's much appreciated. > Thank you > Cristina > > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com > > ___ > UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Jim Healis Sr. Network Engineer wine.com Tel: (510) 818-7300 Cell: (510) 418-6210 ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CID exam
Have you ever had one of those times where you took a test, marked a question because you weren't sure about it, and then changed the answer... only to find out that you failed the exam by one percentage point? That happened to me today... My overall scores in each area were about what I expected them to be... but I never expected to fail by one question. Talk about a downer! But I take the test again tomorrow morning... and I now know what I need to focus on: ATM and SNA (my two week points). Wish me luck! Jim Healis, CCNP, CCDA Senior Network Engineer wine.com ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Networkers in Florida
It would be great to meet all of you... but, alas, I will be attending the sold out Las Vegas Networkers. See some of you... maybe. =) Jim Healis, CCNP, CCDA Senior Network Engineer wine.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chuck Larrieu Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 10:32 PM To: Cisco Mail List Subject: Networkers in Florida My boss informs me that he is sending all us SE types to Networkers this year, and that I will be in Orlando for the get together there. ( I've been telecommuting, and I suspect my wife called and asked him to send me as far away as possible :-> ) In any case, I recall a few weeks ago there was some discussion of a Groupstudy get together. I would sure appreciate the opportunity to shake a few hands and hoist a few root beers with you all. So if someone is keeping track, please add me to the list. I look forward to the privilege, and the pleasure of your company. Chuck Please check out my new footers for a new age 1) Altruism http://www.thehungersite.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/HungerSite Please help feed hungry people worldwide. A few seconds a day can make a difference to many people 2) Shameless Hucksterism www.certificationzone.com An excellent study focal point for all levels of certification, as well as the attainment of internetworking expertise. Use my name when you register. You get good study material and I get extra time ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: CID exam
I have to agree that this test is old, and a bit ambiguous on many questions. An example: I ran across a question that asks you to select the best answer about a protocol but don't tell you what protocol they are asking about. All I did, at that point, was try to remember what protocols were focused upon in the reading material and guess at the answer. I will say that I used Robert's book to study for this exam, and I enjoyed his inserts about "real world networking". This exam displays how old it is in the questions it asks about technologies, and Robert's book lets you know that even though you must know this subject for the exam it isn't too prominent in the real world. As for taking the test again... I passed this morning, with a dramatic increase in score: from 64% to 89% And I am proud to change my signature. =) Jim Healis, CCNP, CCDP Senior Network Engineer wine.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Priscilla Oppenheimer Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 9:59 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: CID exam Will Cisco be rewriting the CID exam soon? I notice that the CCDP 2.0 list still includes CID 3.0 640-025. The test is ancient, and many of the questions were written to certify instructors. (I have inside information on this! ;-) Some of these questions miss the mark for people who won't be teaching the class. Priscilla At 09:31 AM 6/1/2000 -0700, Robert Padjen wrote: >I think that most people fail to understand that the >CID exam is perhaps the most unique of the series. >There is no practicality, and, while I was >disappointed with the age of the exam, I thought that >it opened the door to the design world better than the >technical exams - routing, switching, etc. Since I >love design I went beyond these parameters and wrote >roughly 50% of the study guide (Sybex) in that vain >and added material like DSL and multicast. > >I think that all of us have been frustrated with the >exams from a style, content or focus perspective from >time to time. I also know that CID is generally >regarded as a hard exam - I disagree - and a lot of >people have avoided the CCDP track from this fear. > >A suggestion would be to participate in the beta >program offered by Cisco. The tests are free, and I >like to fool myself into thinking that they read the >lengthy comments that I make. My understanding is that >there is a group that reviews comments from both the >betas and the live exams, so, as long as you don't >have a time limit concern, use that avenue and >hopefully you/we can effect the certification process. > > > >--- Brad Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> that CID test sucks >> >> -Brad Ellis >> CCIE#5796 >> CCDP, CCNA, MCNE, MCSE >> ""Jim Healis"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >> > Have you ever had one of those times where you >> took a test, marked a >> > question because you weren't sure about it, and >> then changed the answer... >> > only to find out that you failed the exam by one >> percentage point? >> > >> > That happened to me today... >> > My overall scores in each area were about what I >> expected them to be... >> but >> > I never expected to fail by one question. Talk >> about a downer! >> > But I take the test again tomorrow morning... and >> I now know what I need >> to >> > focus on: ATM and SNA (my two week points). >> > >> > Wish me luck! >> > >> > Jim Healis, CCNP, CCDA >> > Senior Network Engineer >> > wine.com >> > >> > __ Priscilla Oppenheimer Phone 541-482-5685 Fax 541-488-1708 Web http://www.priscilla.com ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Off Topic but of note - CCNP Certificates are out
Hey, no fair! =( I took my CID test before my CCNP pack has arrived. Fortunately I passed it... so I don't need the training. What a waste. =) Jim Healis, CCNP, CCDP Senior Network Engineer wine.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chuck Larrieu Sent: Monday, June 05, 2000 3:24 PM To: Cisco Mail List Subject: Off Topic but of note - CCNP Certificates are out Got mine today. And in the package was a nice little treat. Details concerning how to get access to a free on line CID training course. Just in the nick of time. I start class next week. :-> Chuck Please check out my new footers for a new age 1) Altruism http://www.thehungersite.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/HungerSite Please help feed hungry people worldwide. A few seconds a day can make a difference to many people 2) Shameless Hucksterism www.certificationzone.com An excellent study focal point for all levels of certification, as well as the attainment of internetworking expertise. Use my name when you register. You get good study material and I get extra time ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [Fwd: Morning]
I think what he was talking about is turning off split horizon if the spoke sites have a PVC defined between them. Split horizon can be left on and the site will know about each other through the hub. In other words: If you have a strict hub and spoke topology then you can leave split horizon turned on and the sites will know about each other through the hub. But if you have a fully meshed FR network with a hub and spoke topology then you must turn off split horizon so that each spoke can talk to other spokes without going through the hub. Make sense? =) Jim Healis, CCNP, CCDP Senior Network Engineer wine.com cell: (510) 418-6210 office: (510) 818-7352 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott Livingston Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 10:16 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Fwd: Morning] can someone help out here please? THANKS! subject: Morning Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 07:50:00 -0500 From: Scott Livinston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jon Helmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This is reference to Mr. David Wosefer's white paper about Frame Relay.. David, We are currently running a small F.R. network over here and something you wrote contradicted what we currently have in operation.. Currently we have a hub and spoke topology, 3 spokes to be exact... we are an IP, partial meshed network running subinterfaces and EIGRP.. You mentioned in your paper that you need to turn off ip split-horizon on the subinterfaces if the spokes are to know about the other spokes networks.. Well in our case we don't have ip split horizons turned off and the spokes know about all other spokes... How could this be? I had my lead engineer look @ this and we both cant figure out this discrepancy between what you published and what we are currently running over here... If you get some time could you please show me where i might be lost? Thanks for your help! -- Scott M. Livingston Network Engineer (CCNP) 12851 Foster Overland Park, KS 66213 800.888.7535 913.402.7844 x1056 913.814.7849 Fax "Make every swing as if it were your last" -Gary Schroer -- ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [Fwd: Morning]
Whew! It looks like we all got different views of the same network from the small bit of information he gave in the original message. I think if we had the chance to see the router configs form the beginning, we would have come to the same answer. And if we took all of our answers, squished them together and removed the redundancy, we could have written a paragraph that would completely explain split-horizon in a FR network. Wow... so much knowledge in such a small group. =) Jim Healis, CCNP, CCDP Senior Network Engineer wine.com cell: (510) 418-6210 office: (510) 818-7352 -Original Message- From: Kenny Sallee [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 11:20 AM To: Jim Healis; Scott Livingston; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Fwd: Morning] Actually -- I thought that in a partial mesh and no sub-if's, you must disable it. Or the Hub will not advertise to spoke 1 the routes it learned from spoke 2 - cuz it is configured on the major interface and thus will not advertise a network it learned on that interface, out that interfacewew...Got that? Even with a partial mesh and sub-if's, you still need it enabled. If the spokes have a PVC between them, then you are fully meshed and should disable it IF you are not using sub-if's. If using sub-if's - leave it enabled. Please correct me if wrong. Kenny - Original Message ----- From: "Jim Healis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Scott Livingston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 10:35 AM Subject: RE: [Fwd: Morning] > I think what he was talking about is turning off split horizon if the spoke > sites have a PVC defined between them. Split horizon can be left on and the > site will know about each other through the hub. In other words: If you have > a strict hub and spoke topology then you can leave split horizon turned on > and the sites will know about each other through the hub. But if you have a > fully meshed FR network with a hub and spoke topology then you must turn off > split horizon so that each spoke can talk to other spokes without going > through the hub. > > Make sense? =) > > Jim Healis, CCNP, CCDP > Senior Network Engineer > wine.com > > cell: (510) 418-6210 > office: (510) 818-7352 > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scott > Livingston > Sent: Tuesday, June 06, 2000 10:16 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Fwd: Morning] > > can someone help out here please? THANKS! > subject: >Morning >Date: >Tue, 06 Jun 2000 07:50:00 -0500 > From: >Scott Livinston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: >[EMAIL PROTECTED], Jon Helmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > This is reference to Mr. David Wosefer's white paper about Frame Relay.. > > David, > > We are currently running a small F.R. network over here and something > you wrote contradicted what we currently have in operation.. Currently > we have a hub and spoke topology, 3 spokes to be exact... we are an IP, > partial meshed network running subinterfaces and EIGRP.. You mentioned > in your paper that you need to turn off ip split-horizon on the > subinterfaces if the spokes are to know about the other spokes > networks.. Well in our case we don't have ip split horizons turned off > and the spokes know about all other spokes... How could this be? I had > my lead engineer look @ this and we both cant figure out this > discrepancy between what you published and what we are currently running > > over here... If you get some time could you please show me where i might > > be lost? Thanks for your help! > > -- > Scott M. Livingston > Network Engineer (CCNP) > 12851 Foster > Overland Park, KS 66213 > 800.888.7535 > 913.402.7844 x1056 > 913.814.7849 Fax > > "Make every swing as if it were your last" > -Gary Schroer > -- > > ___ > UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FW: Microsoft 'Routers'
Jim Healis, CCNP, CCDP Senior Network Engineer wine.com cell: (510) 418-6210 office: (510) 818-7352 -Original Message- From: Jim Healis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 11:24 AM To: Billy Monroe Subject: RE: Microsoft 'Routers' I could see this becoming a problem... Just imagine a junior engineer saying to himself: "Hey, I could cut costs by not buying Cisco routers and just turning on routing on all my Win2K boxes. That way I'll have tons of redundancy and the network is as reliable as the servers that are on it." Does that statement send shivers down your spine? I can hear the rumble of giant routing tables right now... Jim Healis, CCNP, CCDP Senior Network Engineer wine.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Billy Monroe Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 11:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Microsoft 'Routers' I see that Microsoft has provided resources to configure OSPF and RIP in Windows 2000 servers to provide routing capabilities. Has anybody evaluate this ? Do you think this could substitute 'real' routers ? Thanks, ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
