Re:ADSL over ISDN question [7:70946]
i would like to thank Devrim and Duy helping with my query about 836 router for ADSL over ISDN, yes i had to upgrade IOS version to 12.2(13)ZG from there everything was 'pie', once again thank you Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=70946t=70946 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ADSL over ISDN question [7:70676]
Hello i am having layer 1 problems in placing an 836 router for ADSL over ISDN, the story so far ; the LEDs of the ATM interface (Rx,Tx and CD) keep going on and off(constantly, yes i know, not good), doing a #show ip int brief, obviously shows that both ATM0 and ATM0.1 are in down state (they are not admin. down), i have followed Cisco4s troubleshooting 'steps' from their website, from checking if DSL port is plugged in correctly, checking correct powersupply, placing dsl operating-mode in auto to checking if the circuit is tested (i have placed an Alcatel SpeedTouch and it works), now i am running out of options. a curious thing is when i issue a #debug atm event, i get the usual readout for activation state changes, then : LOCAL:Max noise margin for power cutoff 31 followed by a long list of bad news, modem state 0x8, on other adsl capable cisco routers(not over ISDN) i usually have dsl power-cutback set at 0 at the interface ATM 0, whereas with this router, i dont have this option. i tried to hunt for any intel relating to what does this power-cutback 'feature' actually do and if its related to this layer 1 problem and found nothing, maby i am taking the wrong approach to figuering what is wrong/missing, maby i should leave that Alcatel modem running and put that cisco router back in the box thing is i dont know where to look anymore, help? ;) sample of my config: ! vpdn enable ! vpdn-group pppoe request-dialin protocol pppoe ! interface Ethernet0 ip address 192.168.0.210 255.255.255.0 ip nat inside ip tcp adjust-mss 1452 ! interface ATM0 no ip address no atm ilmi-keepalive dsl operating-mode auto ! ! interface ATM0.1 point-to-point pvc 0/35 pppoe-client dial-pool-number 1 ! ! interface Dialer1 mtu 1492 ip address negotiated ip nat outside encapsulation ppp dialer pool 1 no cdp enable ppp chap hostname xxx ppp chap password 7 xxx ppp pap sent-username xxx password 7 xxx ! ip nat inside source list 1 interface Dialer1 overload ip classless ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Dialer1 ! access-list 1 permit 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.255 ! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=70676t=70676 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ADSL and PIX puzzle [7:63458]
Hello networkers, I am trying to conjure up a working config for an ADSL link with static IPs for a 827 series router, these public IPs are supposed to point to, say a webserver, that sits behind a pix firewall (which is directly connected to 827 router4s ethernet interface), problem is when I try to come up with a working config. I find myself getting into trouble. (The catch is, I need the webserver behind that pix.) Now this gets me using NAT twice to get a public IP from the internet through the router past the pix and into my webserver, I know it doesn4t sound right and obviously does not work either ;), Any help/clue/criticisms are most welcome ;) Ok, What it looks like so far: [internet] [router] -[pix] -[lan/webserver] [827series]-[506E]---[lan/webserver] IP addresses: For internet access I have 200.10.10.136 mask 255.255.255.0 Public IPs: 200.10.15.184 255.255.255.248 (for example) Public IP for my webserver is 200.10.15.189 Router 827: -- ! int eth0 ip address 192.168.0.200 255.255.255.255.0 ip nat inside ! int atm0 no ip address dsl operating-mode auto ! int atm0.1 point-to-point no ip address pvc 0/35 pppoe-cliente dial-pool-number 1 ! int dialer1 ip address 200.10.10.136 255.255.255.0 ip nat outside dialer pool 1 ! ip nat inside source list 1 interface dialer1 overload ip nat inside source static tcp 192.168.1.30 80 200.10.15.189 80 extendable access-list 1 permit 192.168.0.0 0.0.0.255 ! ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 interface dialer1 ! PIX 506E: - ! nameif eth0 outside security0 nameif eth1 inside security 100 ! ip address outside 192.168.0.201 255.255.255.0 ip address inside 192.168.1.21 255.255.255.0 ! route outside 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.200 1 ! global (outside) 1 192.168.0.202-192.168.0.248 nat (inside) 1 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 ! name 192.168.1.30 webserver ! static (inside,outside) 200.10.15.189 webserver ! access-list acl_out permit tcp any host 200.10.15.189 eq 80 ! access-group acl_out in interface outside ! Maby I am going about this the wrong way, maby there is still hope just by tweaking my static nat translation at the router. If you have reached this far, thank you for your time and effort. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=63458t=63458 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PIX and the Activation Key [7:59574]
Greetings, I have been given the opportunity to install/configure a new 506E pix firewall which our client had purchased from another supplier. Configuring it to provide basic connectivity seemed somewhat linear (I will not be using any IPsec features ;) ), the client had also purchased a 168 bit licence key. Ok, my question is, what am I supposed to do with this serial number provided on a (official-looking) document that accompanied the pix? I thought the pix would prompt me for an activation key after booting the flash, as explained in this url, http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/vpndevc/ps2030/products_installation_g uide_chapter09186a0080089812.html#xtocid38 ? however, it booted up normally into the default prompt ( pixfirewall ). Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59574t=59574 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: %static entry in use, cannot remove [7:31560]
just want to say thanx for all your suggestions. yes, i had to clear up my ip nat translations before removing that entry. thanx. ;) Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=31595t=31560 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Worm probes [7:20289]
- Original Message - From: Leigh Anne Chisholm To: Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 5:03 PM Subject: FW: Worm probes [7:20289] A la Chuck style, I'm forwarding this for those of you that don't follow the NANOG newsgroup... -- Leigh Anne -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 9:30 AM To: Bryan Heitman Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Worm probes On Tue, 18 Sep 2001 10:22:06 CDT, Bryan Heitman said: We're also seeing a large increase in this activity. This seems to be more severe than the first time. Have an additional 30 to 40 meg inbound from this. This seems to be the culprit: Concept Virus(CV) V.5, Copyright(C)2001 R.P.China I've nailed a copy, and am working on getting it to the right security people. A *PRELIMINARY* (eyeballing the output of 'strings' indicates that this one *both* sends itself via-email a la SirCam, *AND* scans for vulnerable web servers, and if it finds a vulnerable server, it causes anybody visiting that webpage to be offered a contaminated .exe as well. I do *NOT* have a handle on what malicious effects it has other than just propagating. This one's nasty, folks... -- Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=20314t=20289 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Worm probes [7:20289]
oops, anyway, here it is again, http://www.datarescue.com/fprot/virinfo/nimda.htm (is it 'related' ? ) - Original Message - From: dlci_16 To: Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 9:11 PM Subject: Re: Worm probes [7:20289] - Original Message - From: Leigh Anne Chisholm To: Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 5:03 PM Subject: FW: Worm probes [7:20289] A la Chuck style, I'm forwarding this for those of you that don't follow the NANOG newsgroup... -- Leigh Anne -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2001 9:30 AM To: Bryan Heitman Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Worm probes On Tue, 18 Sep 2001 10:22:06 CDT, Bryan Heitman said: We're also seeing a large increase in this activity. This seems to be more severe than the first time. Have an additional 30 to 40 meg inbound from this. This seems to be the culprit: Concept Virus(CV) V.5, Copyright(C)2001 R.P.China I've nailed a copy, and am working on getting it to the right security people. A *PRELIMINARY* (eyeballing the output of 'strings' indicates that this one *both* sends itself via-email a la SirCam, *AND* scans for vulnerable web servers, and if it finds a vulnerable server, it causes anybody visiting that webpage to be offered a contaminated .exe as well. I do *NOT* have a handle on what malicious effects it has other than just propagating. This one's nasty, folks... -- Valdis Kletnieks Operating Systems Analyst Virginia Tech Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=20325t=20289 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Access-list and Port Scanner [7:19123]
nmap has unfortunately been ported to window$ by an excellent team, link? ; http://www.eeye.com/html/Research/Tools/index.html have fun =_= - Original Message - From: Will Francis To: Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2001 6:50 PM Subject: Access-list and Port Scanner [7:19123] Hi Guys I'm currently looking at how secure are access-lists to act as a firewall. Guy I'm having no luck at all finding a windows port scanner which is similar to port scanners on Linux/Unix platform, for instance let say NMAP. Come on windows guys, however we wont get in to a conversation about platforms windows/Linux here, just after a good port scanner. cheers Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=19130t=19123 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: I HAVE QUESTION How can i know who conn to my rout [7:17601]
What if u enable'ip route-cache flow' and then do a #sh ip cache flow, what if u enable logging (tweeking your access-list accordingly), if you using nat, try #sh ip na tr, or get hold of a sniffer, don4t know if your 'boss' would agree :=) - Original Message - From: To: Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 12:25 AM Subject: Re: I HAVE QUESTION How can i know who conn to my rout [7:17594] I've lost the beginning of this thread, but show users is another possibility. JMcL - Forwarded by Jenny Mcleod/NSO/CSDA on 29/08/2001 09:05 am - John Neiberger cc: Sent by: Subject: Re: I HAVE QUESTION How can i know [EMAIL PROTECTED]who conn to my rout [7:17583] 29/08/2001 08:31 am Please respond to John Neiberger How about show tcp brief? PHIMHONGKONG 8/28/01 4:14:25 PM but those command is only show you a telnet session or soem one currently log in router i would like to kow the command like show all ip connecting to the router Thanks all Shojayi Joe wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Try a router show sessions show sessions is the command Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=17601t=17601 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
