RE: Connection to host lost [7:27254]
Here it is: line vty 0 4 session-timeout 20 no exec exec-timeout 0 0 password login transport input lat pad v120 mop telnet rlogin updtn nasi Thanks, Pierre-Alex -Original Message- From: Erick B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 2:30 AM To: pierreg; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Connection to host lost [7:27254] Whats your line vty config like? --- pierreg wrote: > I can ping my terminal server (2511) but when I > attempt to telnet to it I > get the message " connection to host lost" > > Any suggestions? > > Pierre-Alex __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month. http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27266&t=27254 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Connection to host lost [7:27254]
Problem solved. I changed "no exec" to "exec" that did it. Do you know a place where I can read in details about the exec process? Pierre-Alex -- New config: line vty 0 4 session-timeout 20 exec-timeout 0 0 password login transport input lat pad v120 mop telnet rlogin udptn nasi -Original Message- From: Erick B. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 2:30 AM To: pierreg; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Connection to host lost [7:27254] Whats your line vty config like? --- pierreg wrote: > I can ping my terminal server (2511) but when I > attempt to telnet to it I > get the message " connection to host lost" > > Any suggestions? > > Pierre-Alex __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month. http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27286&t=27254 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Slimline 2 [7:27365]
I am using the Slimline 2 ISDN simulator from PDS technologies. I cannot get the SPID to be accepted. (See below) ISDN BRI0 interface dsl 0, interface ISDN Switchtype = basic-5ess Layer 1 Status: ACTIVE Layer 2 Status: TEI = 64, Ces = 1, SAPI = 0, State = MULTIPLE_FRAME_ESTABLISHE TEI 64, ces = 1, state = 4(await init) spid1 configured, no LDN, spid1 sent, spid1 NOT valid I have not modifed the default phone numbers and configured on Slimline Below are my configs for bri0 interface BRI0 ip address 10.0.0.1 255.255.255.0 encapsulation ppp no ip route-cache no ip mroute-cache dialer map ip 10.0.0.2 dialer-group 1 isdn switch-type basic-5ess isdn spid1 Is there a default LDN number I have to configure? Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27365&t=27365 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Slimline 2 [7:27365]
THANKS! -Original Message- From: Duncan Personal Sent: Mon 11/26/2001 2:55 AM To: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel Cc: Subject: RE: Slimline 2 [7:27365] Hi Pierre-Alex, The PDS SDN simulator conforms to the European Telecommunications Standards Institute. I believe you need to configure basic-net3 as your switch-type. Regards Duncan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Pierre-Alex J. Guanel Sent: 26 November 2001 21:02 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Slimline 2 [7:27365] I am using the Slimline 2 ISDN simulator from PDS technologies. I cannot get the SPID to be accepted. (See below) ISDN BRI0 interface dsl 0, interface ISDN Switchtype = basic-5ess Layer 1 Status: ACTIVE Layer 2 Status: TEI = 64, Ces = 1, SAPI = 0, State = MULTIPLE_FRAME_ESTABLISHE TEI 64, ces = 1, state = 4(await init) spid1 configured, no LDN, spid1 sent, spid1 NOT valid I have not modifed the default phone numbers and configured on Slimline Below are my configs for bri0 interface BRI0 ip address 10.0.0.1 255.255.255.0 encapsulation ppp no ip route-cache no ip mroute-cache dialer map ip 10.0.0.2 dialer-group 1 isdn switch-type basic-5ess isdn spid1 Is there a default LDN number I have to configure? Pierre-Alex [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27374&t=27365 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Slimline 2 [7:27365]
THANKS!
-Original Message-
From: Brad Ellis
Sent: Mon 11/26/2001 2:18 PM
To: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel
Cc:
Subject: Re: Slimline 2 [7:27365]
Pierre,
Hi! You have the wrong switch type configured for the Simline2.
You want:
ISDN switch-type basic-net3
Also, this switch type does NOT use spids! FYI
thanks,
-Brad Ellis
CCIE#5796 (R&S / Security)
Network Learning Inc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
used Cisco gear: www.optsys.net
CCIE Labs, racks, and classes:
http://www.ccbootcamp.com/quicklinks.html
""Pierre-Alex J. Guanel"" wrote in
message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I am using the Slimline 2 ISDN simulator from PDS
technologies.
>
> I cannot get the SPID to be accepted. (See below)
>
>
> ISDN BRI0 interface
> dsl 0, interface ISDN Switchtype = basic-5ess
> Layer 1 Status:
> ACTIVE
> Layer 2 Status:
> TEI = 64, Ces = 1, SAPI = 0, State =
MULTIPLE_FRAME_ESTABLISHE
> TEI 64, ces = 1, state = 4(await init)
> spid1 configured, no LDN, spid1 sent, spid1 NOT
valid
>
> I have not modifed the default phone numbers and
configured on
> Slimline
>
> Below are my configs for bri0
> interface BRI0
> ip address 10.0.0.1 255.255.255.0
> encapsulation ppp
> no ip route-cache
> no ip mroute-cache
> dialer map ip 10.0.0.2
> dialer-group 1
> isdn switch-type basic-5ess
> isdn spid1
>
> Is there a default LDN number I have to configure?
>
> Pierre-Alex
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27371&t=27365
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Security: Microsoft RADIUS and Cisco [7:27554]
I have the following configuration on my router: radius-server host auth-port 1812 acct-port 1813 radius-server retransmit 3 radius-server timeout 20 radius-server key ! I have configured IAS with my router as the client and the Client-Vendor as Cisco The shared secret is the same as the radius-server When I telnet to the router, after having entered a valid username and password, I get the message "%authentication failed". I have turned on radius debugging on the router but I don't see anything. Did I miss something obvious? Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=27554&t=27554 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Macro [7:28171]
Does anyone know how to script the reverse telnet Ctl+Shift+6 x key sequence using Teraterm? My current script (below), types the x but does not seem to execute the Ctl+Shift+6. OR maybe something is happening after the Ctl+Shift+6 is sent and before the line "sendkcode 45 1" is issued. I don't know... sendkcode 1543 1 sendkcode 45 1 Thanks Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28171&t=28171 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PIX no client connectivity [7:28625]
>From a client (inside) I can ping the inside interface of the PIX . >From a client (outside) I can ping the outside interface of the PIX. However no (inside) client manages to ping or do any sort of traffic with hosts outside the PIX. Do you spot where my problem is? Thank you!!! BTECHPIX# sh config : Saved : PIX Version 5.1(2) nameif ethernet0 outside security0 nameif ethernet1 inside security100 enable password encrypted passwd encrypted hostname BTECHPIX fixup protocol ftp 21 fixup protocol http 80 fixup protocol h323 1720 fixup protocol rsh 514 fixup protocol smtp 25 fixup protocol sqlnet 1521 names access-list acl_ping permit icmp any any pager lines 24 logging on no logging timestamp no logging standby no logging console no logging monitor no logging buffered no logging trap no logging history logging facility 20 logging queue 512 interface ethernet0 auto interface ethernet1 auto mtu outside 1500 mtu inside 1500 ip address outside 209.152.115.123 255.255.255.0 ip address inside 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.0 no failover failover timeout 0:00:00 failover ip address outside 0.0.0.0 failover ip address inside 0.0.0.0 arp timeout 14400 global (outside) 1 209.152.115.125 nat (inside) 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0 route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 209.152.115.1 1 timeout xlate 3:00:00 conn 1:00:00 half-closed 0:10:00 udp 0:02:00 timeout rpc 0:10:00 h323 0:05:00 timeout uauth 0:05:00 absolute aaa-server TACACS+ protocol tacacs+ aaa-server RADIUS protocol radius no snmp-server location no snmp-server contact snmp-server community public no snmp-server enable traps floodguard enable isakmp identity hostname . Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28625&t=28625 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PIXL: no client connectivity [7:28685]
>From a client (inside) I can ping the inside interface of the PIX . >From a client (outside) I can ping the outside interface of the PIX. However no (inside) client manages to ping or do any sort of traffic with hosts outside the PIX. I have the feeling that I have a Global or PAT issue. Do you spot where my problem is? Thank you!!! BTECHPIX# sh config : Saved : PIX Version 5.1(2) nameif ethernet0 outside security0 nameif ethernet1 inside security100 enable password encrypted passwd encrypted hostname BTECHPIX fixup protocol ftp 21 fixup protocol http 80 fixup protocol h323 1720 fixup protocol rsh 514 fixup protocol smtp 25 fixup protocol sqlnet 1521 names access-list acl_ping permit icmp any any pager lines 24 logging on no logging timestamp no logging standby no logging console no logging monitor no logging buffered no logging trap no logging history logging facility 20 logging queue 512 interface ethernet0 auto interface ethernet1 auto mtu outside 1500 mtu inside 1500 ip address outside 209.152.115.123 255.255.255.0 ip address inside 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.0 no failover failover timeout 0:00:00 failover ip address outside 0.0.0.0 failover ip address inside 0.0.0.0 arp timeout 14400 global (outside) 1 209.152.115.125 nat (inside) 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0 route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 209.152.115.1 1 timeout xlate 3:00:00 conn 1:00:00 half-closed 0:10:00 udp 0:02:00 timeout rpc 0:10:00 h323 0:05:00 timeout uauth 0:05:00 absolute aaa-server TACACS+ protocol tacacs+ aaa-server RADIUS protocol radius no snmp-server location no snmp-server contact snmp-server community public no snmp-server enable traps floodguard enable isakmp identity hostname . Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28685&t=28685 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Routing Loop [7:29920]
I am looking for a good definition of "routing loop". Anyone? Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=29920&t=29920 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Routing Loop [7:29919]
I would like to create a routing loop for experimental purposes. How do you go about creating one? Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=29919&t=29919 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Routing Loop [7:29922]
My own attempt: The packets keep bouncing back and forth between two interfaces without reaching their destination. Pierre-Alex -Original Message- From: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 7:47 AM To: Cisco Subject: Routing Loop I am looking for a good definition of "routing loop". Anyone? Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=29922&t=29922 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FW: Routing Loop [7:29921]
Answering my own question. Remove: split-horizon. Pierre=Alex -Original Message- From: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 7:44 AM To: Cisco Subject: Routing Loop I would like to create a routing loop for experimental purposes. How do you go about creating one? Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=29921&t=29921 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128]
Can a Cisco firewall do this? Pierre-Alex -Original Message- From: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 6:07 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Permissions: read but don't copy Hi all, I am running Windows 2000 Advanced Server. I would like to allow users (Windows 98 / Windows 2000 Professional) to read a file, but prevent them to copy it electronically to their desktop. It looks like Windows 2000 does not have the permissions to accomplish this. Has anyone done this before? Thanks, Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=31128&t=31128 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128]
Hi Andy, Thank for the answer. I have no control over the users' desktop, therefore I cannot remove the write permission on their machines. The solution has to be implemented on the server. Also, I thought that the latest PIX were doing content filtering If not, I am surprised that Cisco does not support this feature. Pierre-Alex -Original Message- From: Andy Leaning [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 6:54 AM To: "Pierre-Alex J. Guanel" Subject: Re: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128] PIX can't prevent this - this application layer stuff - but you can do it in Windows. Simply remove write permission on the desktop folder for the logged on user. Of course they can still put the file elsewhere on the PC, I'd need to know more if you want this stopped as well. Andy Leaning - Original Message - From: ""Pierre-Alex J. Guanel"" Newsgroups: groupstudy.cisco Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 12:19 PM Subject: RE: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128] > Can a Cisco firewall do this? > > Pierre-Alex > > -Original Message- > From: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 6:07 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Permissions: read but don't copy > > > Hi all, > > I am running Windows 2000 Advanced Server. > > I would like to allow users (Windows 98 / Windows 2000 Professional) to read > a file, > > but prevent them to copy it electronically to their desktop. It looks like > Windows 2000 does not > > have the permissions to accomplish this. Has anyone done this before? > > Thanks, > > Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=31151&t=31128 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128]
Hi Daniel, You are right on the second point. The only way (that I know of)to accomplish the requirement is to deny the users the permission to write to their hard drive. Windows 2000 does have a very granular security, unfortunately, the way it is setup, if you can read a file from a server, you can also copy it to your machine. --- As Andy explained, since I have no control over the users' machine, I am stuck unless I use a web base interface (see previous messages)-- One the first point, I am not so sure. My understanding is that content filtering does look inside the packets (application layer) and uses what it sees to filter traffic. Any firewall expert want to comment? Pierre-Alex -Original Message- From: Daniel Cotts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 10:32 AM To: 'Pierre-Alex J. Guanel' Subject: RE: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128] Firewalls make decisions based on IP addresses and port numbers. So that doesn't look like a good candidate. I would think that W2K would have your solution. (I am in the dumb user category with MicroSoft). Cannot you set rights on files or folders? Is your problem that they can do either a copy or a "cut and paste" once they can read the file? Just thinking out loud - it would seem that their local machine would have to be severely restricted - as in a dumb terminal. > -----Original Message- > From: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 6:19 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128] > > > Can a Cisco firewall do this? > > Pierre-Alex > > -Original Message- > From: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 6:07 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Permissions: read but don't copy > > > Hi all, > > I am running Windows 2000 Advanced Server. > > I would like to allow users (Windows 98 / Windows 2000 > Professional) to read > a file, > > but prevent them to copy it electronically to their desktop. > It looks like > Windows 2000 does not > > have the permissions to accomplish this. Has anyone done this before? > > Thanks, > > Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=31158&t=31128 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128]
Thank you! Pierre-Alex -Original Message- From: Andy Leaning [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 10:12 AM To: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel Subject: Re: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128] Ain't no way PIX will do this. Content filtering refers to looking at the files going across it and possibly blocking them pending their content - ie if they are porn or come from suspect sites - not what the user does with them once they've got them. Even if this was doing what you wanted it requires an extra server (the content filtering server) which I think is about $8k - a lot. Without control over the desktops I can't see how you can achieve what you're trying to do. The only possible exception is that if the users were using a browser and viewing content on a server you control. You might then be able to do something with activeX etc (ie disable the save as function) in the browser. Andy - Original Message ----- From: "Pierre-Alex J. Guanel" To: "Andy Leaning" Cc: "Cisco" ; "WindowsNT/2000 Newsgroup" Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 3:59 PM Subject: RE: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128] > > > Hi Andy, > > Thank for the answer. > > I have no control over the users' desktop, therefore I cannot remove the > write permission on their machines. The solution has to be implemented on > the server. Also, I thought that the latest PIX were doing content filtering > If not, I am surprised that Cisco does not support this feature. > > Pierre-Alex > > -Original Message- > From: Andy Leaning [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 6:54 AM > To: "Pierre-Alex J. Guanel" > Subject: Re: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128] > > > PIX can't prevent this - this application layer stuff - but you can do it > in Windows. > > Simply remove write permission on the desktop folder for the logged on user. > Of course they can still put the file elsewhere on the PC, I'd need to know > more > if you want this stopped as well. > > Andy Leaning > > > > - Original Message - > From: ""Pierre-Alex J. Guanel"" > Newsgroups: groupstudy.cisco > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 12:19 PM > Subject: RE: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128] > > > > Can a Cisco firewall do this? > > > > Pierre-Alex > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 6:07 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Permissions: read but don't copy > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > I am running Windows 2000 Advanced Server. > > > > I would like to allow users (Windows 98 / Windows 2000 Professional) to > read > > a file, > > > > but prevent them to copy it electronically to their desktop. It looks like > > Windows 2000 does not > > > > have the permissions to accomplish this. Has anyone done this before? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=31153&t=31128 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128]
This is clear, thanks Pierre-Alex -Original Message- From: Windows NT/2000 Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Kayne Ian (Softlab) Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 3:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128] Content filtering isn't the issue here. If the user opens a document on the server and has to traverse the firewall to get it, the firewall will evaluate the request based on it's ruleset. If it finds the request is valid it will allow the data to be sent (ie: the document downloaded to the pc). At this point the user is able to copy and paste on the local machine, which is outside the control of the firewall. Content filtering only works to control what data you receive, not what you do after you've got it. Ian Kayne Technical Specialist - IT Solutions Softlab Ltd - A BMW Company > -Original Message----- > From: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 07 January 2002 16:44 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128] > > > Hi Daniel, > > You are right on the second point. The only way (that I know of)to > accomplish the requirement is to deny the users the > permission to write to > their hard drive. Windows 2000 does have a very granular security, > unfortunately, the way it is setup, if you can read a file > from a server, > you can also copy it to your machine. --- As Andy explained, > since I have no > control over the users' machine, I am stuck unless I use a web base > interface (see previous messages)-- > > One the first point, I am not so sure. My understanding is > that content > filtering does look inside the packets (application layer) > and uses what it > sees to filter traffic. > > Any firewall expert want to comment? > > Pierre-Alex > > -Original Message- > From: Daniel Cotts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 10:32 AM > To: 'Pierre-Alex J. Guanel' > Subject: RE: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128] > > > Firewalls make decisions based on IP addresses and port > numbers. So that > doesn't look like a good candidate. > I would think that W2K would have your solution. (I am in the > dumb user > category with MicroSoft). Cannot you set rights on files or > folders? Is your > problem that they can do either a copy or a "cut and paste" > once they can > read the file? Just thinking out loud - it would seem that their local > machine would have to be severely > restricted - as in a dumb terminal. > > > -Original Message- > > From: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 6:19 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: Permissions: read but don't copy [7:31128] > > > > > > Can a Cisco firewall do this? > > > > Pierre-Alex > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Pierre-Alex J. Guanel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2002 6:07 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Permissions: read but don't copy > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > I am running Windows 2000 Advanced Server. > > > > I would like to allow users (Windows 98 / Windows 2000 > > Professional) to read > > a file, > > > > but prevent them to copy it electronically to their desktop. > > It looks like > > Windows 2000 does not > > > > have the permissions to accomplish this. Has anyone done > this before? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Pierre-Alex > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- > > The WINNT-L list is hosted on a Windows NT(TM) machine running L-Soft > international's LISTSERV(R) software. For subscription/signoff info > and archives, see http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/winnt-l.html . > COPYRIGHT INFO: > http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?SHOWTPL=COPYRIGHT&L=WINNT-L > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in error and that any use of the information contained within this email or attachments is strictly prohibited. Internet communications are not secure and Softlab does not accept any legal responsibility for the content of this message. Any opinions expressed in the email are those
IGRP Unequal load balancing CHALLENGE [7:31693]
R1 // \ R2__R3 R1 and R2 are connected via a T1 link (Network ID: 10.2.1.0/24 AND a 56K link (Network ID: 10.2.2.0/24) R1 and R3 are connected via a T1 link (Network ID: 10.2.3.0/24 R2 and R3 are connected via ethernet (Network ID:10.1.4.0/24) R1, R2 and R3 are running IGRP 200 The goal is to configure R1 for unequal load balancing and see 2 routes for network 10.1.4.0 in the routing table. PROPOSED SOLUTION: >From R1, the metric of the T1 route to 10.1.4.0 would be: delay bandwidth=(2000+100)+10^(7)/15440 = 8576 >From R1, the metric of the 56K route to 10.1.4.0 would be: delay bandwidth=(2000+100)+10^(7)/56 = 180671 So the variance would be 22 because 180671/8576 = 21.07 On R1, we should configure the variance as 22 Does that look right? Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=31693&t=31693 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PPTP - Conduit - Protocol 47 [7:31748]
How do you configure a conduit to let this go through: Source 0.0.0.0 to Protocol Other Protocol Number 47 I need to this in order to do PPTP through the firewall to a Windows 2000 machine.I am running version 4.0.7 on the PIX and the conduit only have option for tcp or udp. See below from the Cisco documentation: conduit global_ip port[-port] udp|tcp ip_address [netmask] Thank you Pierre-Alex Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=31748&t=31748 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
