Steven,
There's a great little program on SourceForge that's growing
in popularity and IMHO is going to become a great NMS tool. It Integrates
Syslog, Tacacs, RRDtool (Performance Graphs), Maps, Traps, TFTP,
Autodiscovery, Sound Alerts, AAA, Modular and Extensible.It uses a
data
Ken,
Technically speaking, even eBGP has the ability to peer with
neighbors that aren't directly connected. Typically, eBGP peers will have
diect physical connectivity, whereas iBGP peers are part of the same AS, as
long as a route/path exist to that peer, connectivity shouldn't be a
probl
Matt,
That's correct. Think about authentication in terms of cisco's 3
tier design model;
Core(WAN)
Distribution(Routed/Switched)
Access(User)
This is why you get the message you noted.
> 01:57:10: Se0 PPP: Treating connection as a dedicated line
The use of authentication within ppp,
Chuck,
My first thought is what does the "sh ip bgp for the
routes that does not show up in BGP indicate.
I believe there is a requirement not to disable "sync" which suggest that
the routes not being added to the BGP, isn't sync'd with the IGP. Does any
of this have route informati
Folks,
I'm sure this a pretty straight forward but as this ISDN
connection relates to the lab requirements as a complete scenario should
dictate how the requirements are interpreted.
It seems strange that the ISDN link should stay up indefinitely.
Another question here would be what "b
Chuck,
Let's see if I can make any sense in my reply to your comments.
When I think of a "virtual-link" as it relates to opsf, I think of it in
terms of being a tunnel. Also, short of being able to use a virtual-link, a
tunnel is what's recommended to maintain connectivity for any non-
Chuck,
There is a brief article which address those L2 vunerabilities
you mention in the most recent publication of "Packet Magazine"
Nigel
- Original Message -
From: "The Long and Winding Road"
To:
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 2:50 AM
Subject: Re: OT - CDP: Is it treated
Cisconuts,
(Hint)My first question is where exactly is it that you
identified what traffic is matched in the route-map :-)
Some other questions:
How is R6, R5, R4, and R2 all connected? serial, eth0, frame-relay, etc...
This way folks on the list could be of more assistance on
Neil,
I'm a bit confused by your question. Your virtual-link should be
part of the existing addressing scheme. The few things to note here will be
as follows;
Where in relation to the RIP domain is the virtual-link?
What is the mask(/) of the points that identify the virtual-link
I would
Ravi,
Since this problem seem to be a problem on only this specific line
it would suggest that the problem could be a line problem. The other
devices that dial into the PRI (hub) would suggest that the central location
physical layer and equipment, is operating fine.
I would suggest that
Sebastien,
Thanks a lot for the link! Very cool :->
Nigel
- Original Message -
From: "Sebastien Venturoso"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 3:20 AM
Subject: RE: VoIP data rates [7:56942]
> Here is a link for Voice Codec Bandwidth Calculator:
>
> http://tools.cis
Sometime back I upgraded a couple of MC3810's and this was the link I used.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2067212869
You'll get the boot rom and the 64 MB Dram chip.
HTH
Nigel
- Original Message -
From: "Brad Ellis"
To:
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 2:38 PM
Su
Stephane,
If you read a bit further in Doyle's Routing TCP/IP on page
654 you will understand the reasoning for the command within the
configuration. It's important to remember as Doyle also points out earlier
in his IS-IS chapter, that IS-IS was designed with the purpose of
transi
commercial, maybe I simply
reached the end of the Internet. :->
thanks
Nigel
- Original Message -
From: "Howard C. Berkowitz"
To:
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 1:14 AM
Subject: Re: Another Internet Draft of Interest [7:56560]
> "Nigel Taylor" All,
> &g
All,
I just got through some of the presentations linked from the recent
nanog
meeting. The draft in question was presented by Henk Uijterwaal titled "New
Services from RIPE NCC.
There is also this link on the nanog list to his latest draft.
http://www.ripe.net/home/henk/draft-ietf-ippm-o
Robert,
The first thing I would suggest reading is rfc 1256, which
outlines the various extensions used by ICMP, which in turn is used by
ICMP-RDP.
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1256.txt?number=1256
Cisco makes notable use of IDRP in their MobileIP implementation. That
would be a good pl
Jimmy,
I do not have the title you note in your post but a few things to
consider when identifying and trying to configure the root device within
your network.
A MDF or Distribution switch as you mentioned depending on the network
design will more than likely provide both L2 connectivity
Cisco Nuts,
I don't believe you need to use the option keyword
"suppress-map" to achieve your objective. Unless of course you're trying to
find another what of achieving the same goal, for which you would still have
no need for the "summary-only" keyword. Nonetheless, it would
All,
I've listed two pieces of equipment from my Home lab for auction on
ebay, here are the links.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2061687376
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2061687561
Additionally, these devices will give you everything you need to p
relevant here, are no longer called for in the
> market -- witness the exodus of desktop protocols, LANE, etc., in the
> CCIE exam.
My one issue with the exodus of obsolete protocol features is how much of
the obsolete code is actually removed form the code base. Furthermore, what
effects
Hey Chuck,
Yep, I noticed this as well. The greatest addition to
the new site is the button/link(image) that read "Go to the old Site".
After mastering where all the information is on CCO, it's going to take
sometime to fimilarize myself with the new layout..
Nigel
- Ori
All,
This was a recent post on the Nanog list which I thought could get
some interest on the list. Basically, the poster is questioning the
relevance or real world requirements/need for certain commands, in this case
it's the "redistribute bgp" command.
Here's the original post...
Sean D
nettable_walker,
here's a link that should shed some light on what
you're trying to accomplish.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk39/tk42/technologies_configuration_example
09186a0080093d65.shtml
watch the line wrap...
Since you have a Dual-PHY LANE module, you should
Ryan,
I noted your earlier post on this topic and my first question
is.."What's the problem you're trying to solve? Configuring AAA on the
console should be very straight forward, however this could very easily
change based on your identified or outlined requirements. A couple of
quest
Richard,
Once the switch boots up you should be able to use the AMI
account to get in without a password. It's a whole lot like the C5k on
bootup and password recovery. You just need to use the account AMI on
login.
Nigel
>From: "nettable_walker" >Reply-To: "nettable_walker" >T
Neal,
I you'll also need to have the crypto maps added to the physical
interface through which the tunnels are built. Paste a copy of the complete
configs without the debug output. However, what I noted seems to be the
only thing that stands out! Watch the word wrap...
http://www.cisc
Kevin,
In answering your question... Yes, there is a PDM for routers as
well. I believe it's called "Configmaker":-)
Nigel
- Original Message -
From: "Kevin O'Gilvie"
To:
Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 9:44 PM
Subject: PDM [7:52870]
> PDM
> PDM
> PDM..
>
> I dont see w
Kelly,
What does the debug of the RIPv2 MD5 error look like? Trying
posting it (the debug of the authentication, I mean) to the list, I'm sure
someone have seen the error before and can let you know if you've missed
anything other than what you might have already covered.
Nigel
-
All,
I've been trying to obtain a greater understanding of cisco's newest
protocol enhancements technologies/mechanism - GRIP.
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/732/Tech/grip/learn.shtml
It seems very interesting but seems to address some of the same issues
already
identified by the IETF and
Mohammed,
To answer your question read this link..
http://www.radb.net/docs/servfaq.html#one
then, I would sugget you check out the RADB home page. There's quite a bit
of good information on the site, that will most likely answer your other
questions.
http://www.radb.net/d
Robert,
Whenever that happens I'll be more than willing to take that
trash off your hands :-)
On a more serious note, if cisco did take the 25xx models out of the lab,
which will happen in the near future it will be no different from the
removal of "token ring" from the lab. Althoug
All,
I have a couple of questions in reference to a recent post on the
nanog list
about possbily using "De-aggregating Routes". NOw it's understood that
there are
on some inherent flaws(thrashing and blackholing) associated with
overpopulating
the internet route tables through de-aggregation,
et Service
Providers
and Peering and The Art of Peering", suggest that with the exception of
existing "transit" peering
relationships, more and more providers will endeavor to enhance their
services and attractiveness
in an attempt to form direct peering relationships. This
All,
I was doing my usual reading of the nanog mailing list and came across
one
of the more recent threads - "Routing Protocol Security".
What I found interesting was the name of the original poster, which noted,
Jeff Doyle! Now, I'm sure there are quite a number of "Jeff Doyle's"
on the plan
nettable_walker,
The changes in the lab to remove token ring as
"Howard" suggested now makes
equipment affordable to just about anyone. The emphasis here being..token
or ethernet, they all provide
a way to test the theory and your understanding of protocol implementatio
James,
See Inline..
- Original Message -
From: "James Wilson"
To:
Sent: Sunday, August 11, 2002 12:34 PM
Subject: * Routing/Subnetting question [7:51193]
> I have a 1750 with a /29 assigned to me, and I need to create a DMZ to put
> a DNS server on so that I can control acce
c both ways ending at Lo0.
>
> If I can get a dialin user on the async line to ping e0/0 of the 3640,
then
> the issue should be resolved.
>
> TIA
>
>
>
>
> >From: "Nigel Taylor"
> >Reply-To: "Nigel Taylor"
> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Tunji,
See Inline...
- Original Message -
From: "Tunji Suleiman"
To:
Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2002 5:20 AM
Subject: Routing with IP Unnumbered Loopback [7:50581]
> Hi all,
>
> I am reposting this because there were no responses to the first post. I
am
> trying to conserve IP
Interesting enough at work we recently had a customer call in an
issue in using one specific host address on the /16 block they own(lease).
Let's say they have 172.16.0.0/16, in which case they perform no
subnetting ( I don't know why?) using the classful mask. In doing this
there are a number o
George,
Priscilla brings up a good point in that this will not be easy.
The most important issue here
is as Priscilla pointed out, is going to revolve around the architecture of
your networks or the network
you use for connectivity(to the rest of the world). Some other questions
that
All,
Being one of the folks currently reading Howard's most recent book
titled - Building Service Provider Networks, I must say that I'm enjoying
the various points being addressed by this thread.
Also, this does remind me of an article in the 2nd Qtr edition
of "Packet Magazine" titled, IS
Howard,
Thanks for the links. I must say that this does clarify a lot
things(about BGP
definitions) and gives me so much to think about. I'll be reading this one
a couple more times,
before I start asking a bunch of questions..:->
Very Nice draft.
Now the "simple" folk can get a b
Annu,
I'll provide a hint !Look at your "as-path" ACL.. the answer
lies therein..:->
Nigel
- Original Message -
From: "Annu Roopa"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 10:56 AM
Subject: BGP community Q [7:48007]
> Group,
>
> I have a community related question and the s
James,
I would have to say that depends. I don't know what you have in
mind, so if you could provide more information as to what you're trying to
accomplish.
I'm sure any number of folks on the list would willing offer a solution to
your problem.
HTH
Nigel
- Original Message ---
John,
There's nothing wrong with your understanding of channelized vs.
unchannelized. I believe your provider's tech dosen't understand or is
completely mis-informed.
Nigel
- Original Message -
From: "John Neiberger"
To:
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 12:10 PM
Subject: Confusion
Nick,
A good place to begin your exploration of DPT and SRP in
particular is always the rfc2892, but
for a really cool overview check out hte following link..
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/17/documents/presentations/tutorial/tutor
ial.htm
HTH
Nigel
P.S. there's so much info on
Folks,
I'm trying to understand how cisco went about grading this exam.
Much like everyone else
I too was told by Prometric when I called in that I had passed the exam
however, the score report
I received had something totally different in mind( yes I failed!)
What I thought was strange
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=47132&t=47132
--
FAQ, list archives, and
John, All,
Actually, both router interfaces(DCE or DTE) will
show "down/down" if the both ports remain "administratively down".:->
Seriously, where I work since alot of our circuit are located in
various locations within a number of our building we make use
of what we call an Automatic Networ
Hunt,
Read this link and think about your scenario for a moment. "What
is the problem to be solved?"
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/bgpfaq_5816.shtml#12
Then read this link. The emphasis here is that although RTA, RTB, RTC, RTD,
and RTE are in the same confed AS1, RTB and RTC,
Chuck,
I did a search on CCO and found a few links which state the
following..
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/ip_c
/ipcprt2/1cdigrp.htm
watch the line wrap.
Normally, routers that are connected to broadcast-type IP networks and that
use distance
Peter,
Great! I'm thinking Juniper and the Bear&Gear booth in such close
proximity, may explain
the cascading style format of the JunOS versus Cisco's left justified
(non-hierarchal) based configuration. :->
I'm sure Howard/Priscilla with their experience in software(system)
development
Howard,
I see that Sue Hares will be doing the moderation for the
"Panel: Smart Routing Technologies", but she's
not listed as giving any of the BOF's. Based on your statement I was
thinking Sue would be doing a BOF or
presentation on the BGP convergence drafts, which you mention sh
Peter,
Great! I'm thinking Juniper and the Bear&Gear booth in such close
proximity, may explain
the cascading style format of the JunOS versus Cisco's left justified
(non-hierarchal) based configuration. :-
I'm sure Howard/Priscilla with their experience in software(system)
development
Howard,
I see that Sue Hares will be doing the moderation for the
"Panel: Smart Routing Technologies", but she's
not listed as giving any of the BOF's. Based on your statement I was
thinking Sue would be doing a BOF or
presentation on the BGP convergence drafts, which you menti
All,
I was browsing the NANOG 25 site and took a preview of the presentations
that will be presented during the meeting.
Based on my recent growing interest in Inter-Domain routing and
policies(IRR, RPSL), BGP, and MPLS/TE. I was wondering if anyone on the list
would be in attendance, also
routing policy before trying to configure or implement the
peering relationships.
Well, this was another great learning experience. If this is where
stupidity takes me, I look forward to my next
encounter with stupidity.
Nigel
Still so much to learn...
- Original Message -----
From: "Nige
All,
I just received my copy of Howard's latest book and I'm excited to get
started
reading this title. However, I'm in the midst of finishing reading his
previous book, WAN Survival Guide. Interesting enough this book's
Introduction states,
"This book focuses on the service provider network, an
Howard,
Thanks for the notice on rfc2260. I took a minute to read it
and I can see the benefits in that
the BGP metrics complied by the Routing Table Analysis(APNIC) shows that
25%(if I'm not mistaken)
of the BGP FIB is made up of /24 prefixes. Rfc2270, does fall in line with
rfc1
See Inline...
- Original Message -
From: "Howard C. Berkowitz"
To:
Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: Another BGP attribute question [7:45619]
> At 7:00 AM -0400 6/2/02, Nigel Taylor wrote:
> >All,
> > I was reading the old
All,
I was do some research which led to the following link and I figured
that some of you might find it useful.
I know on the list "Howard" always tries to define his solutions by stating..
"What is the problem, you're trying to solve?" So I figured this would
answer some of those quest
All,
I was reading the old RIPE(22nd meeting minutes) and was wondering,
what
ever became of the BGP
proposal from Tony Bates and Enke Chen for the use of the Destination
Preference Attribute (DPA) for multi-homed sites.
Based on our preivous thread with the known and unknown implications o
Dre,
Question? When did you ever find time to read all of these RFC's?
I'm I to assume
that both you and "Howard" have quite a bit more in common than you
seemingly endless
depth of knowledge in our field.
Maybe the next time I speak with my mother, I'll talk to here about what
possibil
Peter,
It would seem that Cable&Wireless and Above along with RIPE are the
main culprits.
It would seem to me that this inconsistent route issue would present
problems, what I'm I missing? It maybe that I'm not totally
clear on what constitutes an "inconsistent route". RFC 1930 clearly
reat link.. I used this one when I prepared for the lab. It pays to
browse this stuff once in a while.
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/104/index.shtml
Nigel
- Original Message -
From: "Spoerr, Mathias"
To: "Nigel Taylor" ; "cebuano"
; "Jan Gunnik Hop
lmer what do you think about this thread and which solution meets the
requirement?
- Original Message -
From: "Spoerr, Mathias"
To: "Jan Gunnik Hope"
Cc: ; "Nigel Taylor" ;
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2002 4:41 AM
Subject: AW: OSPF problem - 2nd try
> Hello!
&g
MAthais,
I'm not sure if the ASCII art made the journey. but based on
what I believe you're trying to accomplish see Inline...
Note: Questions like this you should post to the main
ist( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ). You'll get a better response.
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: h
Chuck,
This is a very interesting post. I did some checking and I found
this link that might address the requirement based on the design. This can
be done by using 6500 switches instead of routers as depicted in your lovely
ASCII art.
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/pd/si/casi/ca
How about putting them up on the ftp site?
Much Appreciated...
Nigel
- Original Message -
From: "Howard C. Berkowitz"
To:
Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2002 8:29 PM
Subject: Re: Some real theory [7:44491]
> >the link you provide is only a 10 meg document. ;->
>
> Bless .pdf. I downloaded .p
All,
I was just browsing around CCO and came across this link which has some
good coverage of CLNS/ISIS. This link most likely isn't a secret, but for
anyone wanting to get a better understanding of these protocols this seems
like a good addition.
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/97/index.s
All,
I typically try not to get involved in threads like this one, since it
really serves no purpose. I've been a member of this list for some four
plus years and this type of thread always seem to creep into the list.
John's earlier post I think was truely funny and if anyone who read it
Some items I had in my home lab that I no longer need. I'm willing to
let it
all go to 1 buyer for $1200 If interested in individual pieces that's ok
too.
1 Cisco 2517 - 16MB/8MB, 2 serial, 1 BRI(S/T), 1 Token Ring, 8-port MAU
$300
1 Cisco 2521 - 6MB/8MB, 4 Serial(2Sync/2Async), 1 BRI(S/T),
Richard,
If I'm not mistaken the 3920 uses the default bridge (hex)
number of 0x1. You most likely will want to make sure that the second
3920 isn't using the same default ring/bridge IDs.
Here's a link that may "ring" through when trying to figure out these
"tokens" :->
http://www.
See Inline...
>From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" >Reply-To: "Howard C. Berkowitz" >To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: (correction) Method and Process
Scenario 5: OSPF [7:42139] >Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 18:03:20 -0400 > >
>Howard, > > I think I see where you're going. The default on the "DIO" >
>command
Based on chuck's diagram and the use of the "E1" ospf route I think this
would be a matter
of how the enterprise is designed and what type of links interconnect the
various
locations/sites. Simply using the "DIO" metric-type could allow for
suboptimal routing as
chuck noted.
I realize that I wa
uot;Howard C. Berkowitz" >Reply-To: "Howard C. Berkowitz" >To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: (correction) Method and Process
Scenario 5: OSPF [7:42139] >Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 15:31:29 -0400 > >At
2:19 PM -0400 4/21/02, Nigel Taylor wrote: > >Yes, > > &
Yes,
I forgot about the getting that default route into the enterprise
from the CE. That would leave the "default-information orginate" .
Nigel
>From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" >Reply-To: "Howard C. Berkowitz" >To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: (correction) Method and Process
Scenario
See inline
>From: "Howard C. Berkowitz"
>Reply-To: "Howard C. Berkowitz"
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: (correction) Method and Process Scenario 5: OSPF [7:42139]
>Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 09:08:21 -0400
>
> >You can originate a 0.0.0.0 route from each of the ISP connected routers.
> >Idea
Stanzin, Chuck,
I had this happen to me the other day when one of our
engineers made a change to the ACL on one of our BGP peer
connections. Typically all the ACLs are the same on all of our BGP
connections, so when trouble shooting the problem some assumtions were
made. The problem
This is interesting. I work in very operational enviroment so thinking
of accomplishing this task from a standpoint other than configuration
requirements leaves me blank. See Inline..
>From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" >Reply-To: "Howard C. Berkowitz" >To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Method and Proces
John,
You might want to try using the aggregate-address command and see
what magic happens. As a side note.. IGP's summarize, whereas BGP being an
EGP aggregates.
watch the word wrap..
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fipr
rp_r/bgp_r/1rfbgp1.htm#xt
Randy,
Why are you hard coding the ip into the ethernet interface? I
believe in the 12.2 code the command
"ip address dhcp" should be all you need. I use this currently with the
required NAT configurations and everything works fine. Here's a copy of my
relevant config..
interface Et
: Re: multicast / CGMP towards the multicast server [7:33964]
> At 06:18 AM 2/2/02, Nigel Taylor wrote:
>
> >Even in an design where the host and the server reside on the same
> >VLAN(segment) IGMP and CGMP still provide the ability to control flooding
> >of multicas
Chuck,
Thanks... for another great post. Maybe we could get Paul to
make this standard reading for all who join the list, this way we avoid what
we all fear...I dare not say the letters..for they spell "fear" themselves..
Of course the letter I refer to are NDA!
This definitely is
Mitch,
See Inline...
- Original Message -
From: "Eve Mitch"
To:
Sent: Saturday, February 02, 2002 7:18 AM
Subject: Multicast in catalyst 6500 environment [7:34192]
> Hi all,
>
> Have 2 Catalyst 6509 with sup2 and MSFC2 modules in each switch in the
core.
> And 4 Catalyst 6509
his really comes down to the network design as with every other
aspect of building a scalable and efficient network.
Thoughts.. Anyone!
Nigel
> At 09:28 PM 2/1/02, Nigel Taylor wrote:
> >Priscilla,
> > You are correct. Thanks for the added insight.
> >
> &g
from IGMP Snooping, by the way. From what I understand,
> IGMP Snooping allows the switch to proactively snoop into IGMP packets and
> figure out which ones are Joins. IGMP Snooping requires more powerful (and
> more expensive) switching hardware (firmware).
>
> Priscilla
>
>
Michael,
Of course this would depend on if the multicast server and the
host connected on the same switch was assigned to the same vlan(broadcast
domain). Just some quick points to mention..
Routers by default will not forward multicast traffic. However, if you
enabled a multicast
Gil,
We use DS Sniffer Pro 4.5 with the ATM book and we also have the Wandel
and Golterman Domino
analyzer. Both are really good pieces of test equipment.
HTH
Nigel
- Original Message -
From: "Gil Shulman"
To:
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2002 6:11 AM
Subject: ATM Sniffers [7:32624]
Paul,
I believe at one time cisco support the 2500's much like the older
1004/1005 router where they used the PCMCIA as the flash upgrade method of
choice. I have a couple of 2500's with the PCMCIA slot and after trying a
number of different cards I gave up my quest to use the slot.
This i
Paul,
I believe at one time cisco support the 2500's much like the older
1004/1005 router where they used the PCMCIA as the flash upgrade method of
choice. I have a couple of 2500's with the PCMCIA slot and after trying a
number of different cards I gave up my quest to use the slot.
This i
Cisco Nuts,
Short of using the X-modem feature on the 4500's cisco
simply states that you would need another router of the same model. I'm not
sure if this procedure works but it's worth a try.
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/471/76.html
Nigel
- Original Message -
Fr
Ed,
Here's a link that my help explain it all. Watch the word wrap.
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fdia
l_c/fnsprt2/dafadmod.htm#998788
Nigel
- Original Message -
From: "Ed Chuchaisri"
To:
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2002 5:45 AM
Subject
Cisco Breaker,
I was thinking.
One route to guide them,
One static route to override them,
One "floating static" to load-balance them,
And in the RIB make them all equal..
Just say the movie...:-> forgive my waste of bandwidth.
Nigel
- Original Message -
From:
Chuck,
You'll get my vote on being the Saruman! Howard, is it possible
that there might be a few copies of your new book on hand for sale. I got
to thinking a signed copy would do nicely for all of us who haven't seen the
movie yet...Imagine that, a book signed by the "Gandalf of
>>
> >>
> >> Nigel-
> >>
> >> If you dig back through the NANOG archives, there was a rather in
depth
> >> and discouraging discussion of encrypting / authorizing BGP session
> >> neighbors. The general result was that almost nobody supported it, and
>
John,
When I suggested the solution we used to implement VoiP support with
DSN, I was only making reference to the operational configuration required
to support VoIP itself. Having been in the military(AF) for some eight
years I do know of the information Paul mentioned. In our implemen
t
> it was.
>
> While it might or might not be on the CCIE exams, having some form of
> authentication between routing partners is a good thing to practice in
> your test labs, and put into production in your networks.
>
> Andras
>
> -Original Message-
> From:
w.netcginc.com
> (415) 750-3800
>
> Instructor for CCBootcamp 5-day class www.ccbootcamp.com
> __
> CCIE Security Training
> www.netcginc.com/training.htm
>
>
> ""Nigel Taylor"" wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[
Chuck,
Yes, I got the thread on this today and forwarded a copy to
some of my co-workers. I hope folks are making use of the various IOS
implementations to limit the damage done by a prospective attacker. Things
like CBAC, rate-limit could go a long way in simply providing the neede
1 - 100 of 286 matches
Mail list logo
