Hi, im using SecureCRT to gain access to a friends router lab. Ive noticed
that in some instances when im configuring the routers, the system
automatically seems to reset when im opening up a pre existing session from
the TermServ. It goes into configuration mode i.e. askes me:
Would you like to
.
If you are weak in any area then Foundation is not the exam to take.
Peter Walker
--On Friday, May 31, 2002 5:58 PM -0400 Ole Drews Jensen
wrote:
>
> On the other
> hand, if you are perfect in routing and switching, but not so good in
> remote access, Foundation might be be
At 02:52 PM 5/28/2002 -0400, dre wrote:
>""Peter van Oene"" wrote in message
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I'm not sure where to point you. All I can tell you is that it is
> > commonplace and likely will continue to be so.
10:36 AM 5/28/2002 -0400, Wes Stevens wrote:
>Peter I have been following and trading Juniper stock for years. In the
>beginning everyone loved it because it was so focused - just high end
>routers. Two things came together in 2000 to help them grow sales 6x over
>1999 one was the ma
This looks like a summary issue to me. You should see a RIP advertisement
for 172.16.1.0, not 0.0. Of note, the classless and classful behavior are
not entirely related to whether or not an update includes the prefix
length. Make sure you have ip classless enabled and I would try turning
of
Michael>
>(speaking of contract firms), I've noticed that regardless of certs or
>experience, it seems many more places are doing a "6-month right-to-hire"
>because it's so hard to really tell from a resume, certs, experience, or
>even an interview if someone really knows what they're doing. So
Hey Nigel,
I'm not sure where to point you. All I can tell you is that it is
commonplace and likely will continue to be so. I'm currently not aware of
any routing issues that this behavior would induce.
Pete
At 08:04 PM 5/27/2002 -0400, Nigel Taylor wrote:
>Peter,
>
www.mplsrc.com is a good place to start
At 10:21 PM 5/27/2002 -0400, Scott H. wrote:
>Any recommendations for good sources on MPLS?
>
>""Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote in message
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > At 8:58 PM -0400 5/27/02, Scott H. wrote:
> > >I recently completed th
The JNCIE is a difficult exam, however it is quite realistic. Hence, if
you use Junipers in service provider networks and are familiar typical SP
configurations, you should have a decent shot at it. The written test
itself was designed to be fairly challenging and to compliment the lab and
What leads you to believe that they "will be at the tail end of the
recovery?"
At 09:04 PM 5/27/2002 -0400, Wes Stevens wrote:
>Jenny I assume you are talking about Juniper. I really don't know anything
>about their cert. The company I know pretty well. I would not want to be
>looking for a job i
older than 10.3, which is the
latest. This will make sure you will have the same experience then
having a 2511.
Peter Ivo
Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software
IOS (tm) CS Software (CS500-C-M), Version 10.3(7), RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
Copyright (c) 1986-1995 by cisco Systems, Inc.
Compiled
quick comment in line.
At 04:53 PM 5/27/2002 -0400, Chuck wrote:
>I have a question, Howard - in line:
>
>
>""Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote in message
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > This is one of those posts where the attributions have gotten very
> > confused. Comments inline.
One comment inline:
nrf said:
>So while yes, I agree that Cisco and the CCIE will probably get better, if
>you think we're going to have 1999 all over again, you're just deluding
>yourself. The world has changed, and people will simply have to admit that
>when it comes to the value of tech sk
Actually, most of us think its quite cool to see Juniper guys writing Cisco
Titles. Of note, Pete Moyer (also a member of Juniper Pro Services) was
Jeff's technical editor in V1 (I'd think VII as well, though I've not got
the book handy to check).
To respond to the Cisco/Juniper mix, I can sa
exam
results :-). Its frustrating to know that a friend who took the standard
exam two months after me has his results :-)
Should I be concerned that I havent received my results yet?
Peter Walker
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=44853&
This begs the question, what is the difference between a multi-port bridge
and a switch? Or, what is a switch when it routes? I personally think
bridge and router convey with relatively little ambiguity the function of a
device whereas switch is simply a tool that marketing folks use when th
Why do you folks bother arguing these useless points? If you lost a job to
someone who had less experience than you or vice versa, don't cry foul, go
learn how to interview or reevaluate exactly what it is you bring to an
employer and make sure you are getting that across.
At 03:56 PM 5/21/2
Switching is a marketing term. You would be wise to focus on Bridging and
Routing and when the word switch appears, read to fine print to figure out
if the device in question bridges or routes.
At 02:57 PM 5/21/2002 -0400, rtiwari wrote:
>Could somebody will please describe me the difference
The rest is really easy to remember because they are very easy to
project in your head in binary.
0=0
F=F
6=6
9=9
F=F
1=8
2=4
Good Luck,
Peter
Peter Ivo Racz
Hunt Lee wrote:
> I was just wondering if anybody knows a way to translate Ethernet MAC
> (Cananical) to Token MAC (non-Can
Going from memory here, but I think you are wrong. From what I remember the
ASICs and such on the old 10mb routers cant handle the larger frame sizes
that could be generated with dot1q trunking.
Peter
--On Tuesday, May 14, 2002 3:19 AM -0400 John Golovich
wrote:
> I believe a 2500 ser
Couple thoughts here Rick. First off, always consider that there may be
(and usually are) flaws in secondary source material and thus don't believe
everything you read.Beyond that, I have a couple questions related to
the matter.
Primarily, what exactly is a hybrid routing protocol? Hybr
of time
constraints that are applicable (not least of which is the likely ending of
my current employment on June 28th - sometimes it sucks when your employer
is acquired by a bigger company).
Hope this helps
Peter
--On Friday, May 10, 2002 12:39 PM -0400 "Kleberg, Jason"
I have not seen an IOS that offers the ability to rewrite Next_Hop on an
IBGP connection. The behavior of the GSR in this case is what you should
expect. Juniper on the other hand will rewrite Next_Hop in this same
scenario and one needs to keep that in mind if you happen to work with both.
IS-IS routing of IP is a testable subject.
At 11:32 AM 5/2/2002 -0400, Miguel Mitras wrote:
>Hi
>Can anybody answer this vague question; on the Cisco website it says that
>that CLNS OSI is withdrawn from the lab exam. Does this mean that one can
>still expect to be tested on CLNS for IP?
>Cheers
If you don't advertise reachability, you aren't reachable. You should
however be able to get one ISP to allow the other to route its
space. Otherwise, you're looking at getting some PI space, multihoming to
the same ISP, or using some load balancing tools to handle things via dns.
Pete
At
nvolves doing things
in a more practical nature and thus some practical studying can't hurt to
much, particularly when it's free.
Pete
At 11:12 AM 5/1/2002 -0400, Peter Rosenthal wrote:
>Thank you very much for the spam. It is appreciated by all I'm sure.
>Hopefully peo
Thank you very much for the spam. It is appreciated by all I'm sure.
Hopefully people do not contribute to yet another CCIE rack site that uses
GS to spam. I am amazed this is being allowed. But, I guess that's what
happens when you have a "partnership."
Does anyone else see a conflict of inte
commute and I am usually too impatient to wait for delivery :-)
I dont know if they ship internationally though.
Regards
Peter
--On Tuesday, April 30, 2002 10:15 PM -0400 hktco
wrote:
> Where can I get the best price RAM and flash for cisco router (2610)?
> Transportation is a
him personally, or china in general? you can safely assume that china has
plenty of cisco gear.
At 05:00 PM 4/29/2002 -0400, Tom Scott wrote:
>gic tony wrote:
>
> > i am from beijing in china ,just find this forum ,browse for a while
> > very good place .
>
>tony, just wondering, do you have m
onnect two 10.10.1.0 networks to only one router.
Pls. look also @ http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/556/3.html
Regards Peter
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=42642&t=42640
--
FAQ, list archives,
with one answer
possibility only)
Peter
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=42524&t=42513
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosu
running config. Any
intended changes by the copied file will disappear.
Peter
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=42510&t=42491
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.htm
off the top of my head
If these paths were advertised at different times, this could result in
this posting, or be the artifact of some load distribution.
At 03:16 PM 4/24/2002 -0400, Michael Bray wrote:
>I have a router that is running BGP to two different providers... When
>I show the bgp en
Actually, having not ever sat the Lab, Howard does not place himself in an
awkward position with respect to the NDA. Furthermore, as you point out,
his labs may tend to lean toward practicality instead of being purely lab
oriented which in my opinion, is an excellent thing given once you
even
Hope this helps
Peter
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=42323&t=42239
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations t
Hi Mike,
As you already assuming, deleted subinterfaces will be reported by a sh int
command until the router is reloaded. Similarly, removed hardware interfaces
will be reported as "removed" until next router reload.
Bye, Peter
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/re
Hi Tom,
Which URL are you looking for?
At 07:15 PM 4/22/2002 -0400, Tom Scott wrote:
>Music to my ears.
>
>If anyone has a list of exercises for would-be MPLS addicts, please post the
>URL.
>
>-- TT
>
>"Howard C. Berkowitz" wrote:
>
> > >Is there some reason that ATM is necessary for MPLS imple
Is there some reason that ATM is necessary for MPLS implementations in low
end Cisco products? It's been my understanding that VPI/VCI field usage
for labels in any implementation is generally not used. Every mpls network
I've worked on used shim headers which makes MPLS l2 agnostic.
At 05:
Hi all,
My name is Peter and this is my first post, but I read the last 3000
messages... Great place, I am happy I can be here.
Sean, there is a "Groupstudy Japan" mail list, and it is called
[EMAIL PROTECTED] You have to register first though at
egroups.co.jp You should drop a mai
CLNS is not need for IS-IS routing for IP
At 03:03 PM 4/11/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>Did you enable CLNS routing? You need to turn this on before you can
>configure ISIS.
>
>Anthony Pace
>
>
>""nntp.groupstudy.com"" wrote in message
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Hi, Group,
> >
;thought process of the designers:
>
>some snipping done because the thread was getting to be less clear.
>
>""Peter van Oene"" wrote in message
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > inline
> >
> >
> > Was it ever
bed in BGPv4 (or v3 for that matter if i
> >recall correctly)
>
>Given that the OSPF-BGP interaction RFC has been declared "Historic",
>meaning obsolete, that's probably not good evidence.
Was just making the point that beyond OSPF-BGP interaction, I've never see
inline
At 03:37 PM 4/9/2002 -0400, Kent Yu wrote:
>Peter,
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Peter van Oene"
>To:
>Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 3:55 AM
>Subject: Re: iBGP full mesh ? [7:40741]
>
>
> > I don't disagree with most o
ssue, and not actually described in BGPv4 (or v3 for that matter if i
recall correctly)
>See what happens when you read too much Raymond Chandler? :->
>
>Chuck
>
>
>
>""Peter van Oene"" wrote in message
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECT
I don't disagree with most of your points, but really think synch should be
disabled in all cases at all times along with auto summary. It should be
disabled by default and indeed shouldn't even be included as a configurable
option.
At 11:28 AM 4/8/2002 -0400, you wrote:
>It's not default for
Network statements only advertise routes that exists in the routing
table. Further, if you use a "mask" on the statement, you need to match
the prefix exactly. Usually, one uses static routes to null0 to pin up
aggregate routes, or normal static routes (non null0) for others.
At 09:22 AM 4/7
I expect this comment relates more to IBGP where direct reachability is not
the norm.
At 06:55 PM 4/6/2002 -0500, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
>At 01:10 PM 4/6/02, JohnZ wrote:
> >"IP connectivity has to be achieved via a protocol different from BGP;
> >otherwise, the session will be in a race c
I have seen it happen in lab environments. For the most part, it isn't
pretty. It's the worst with OSPF as it isn't possible to get to 100k+
prefixes in ISIS (cap is 32k I believe due to LSP sizes & max
fragments) In my lab, I had to reboot all my cisco devices (4700's,
7513's, 2600's & acc
ailer; Fri, 5 Apr 2002 09:43:38 -0500
>Received: from pvanoene-lt1.usermail.com (natsvc.juniper.net
[207.17.136.130])
> by usermail.com (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id g35EijQ20325
> for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2002 09:44:46 -0500
>Message-Id:
>X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>X-Mailer: Q
.0 R2
R2
ip route 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0 null0
Adding the cable is also helpful, but costs money and requires you to touch
a bunch of routers.
At 09:04 AM 4/5/2002 -0500, Peter van Oene wrote:
>Adding a point to point link between ABR's would enhance the resiliency
>between the two and
Short answer. If you want all the routers in your AS to have full
knowledge of prefixes, buy some memory and extend your BGP cloud to include
them. Otherwise, follow a dynamic default and live with suboptimal
routing. Adding the third router as you suggest is a helpful
option. However, in
One quick point below. Trimmed rest.
Question from Jenny
> >One thing I'm not clear on, though, is why the problem (reportedly)
> >happened before we upgraded to IOS 12.1 - so before a route to null0 was
> >used for the summarised networks (we didn't add one manually). Any
>ideas?
> > I can
Please pardon the snipping (and top posting for that matter) Posted some
notes inline.
>Peter, when you say that the solution could involve "less specific
> >summaries" - do you really mean more specific summaries? Summarising less
> >drastically (e.g. summari
ely)
>
>But I don't think she's looking for a redesign. She's looking for a quick
>fix for now. What did you guys think of the idea of adding another direct
>connection between the two switches and putting it in area 2.1.0.0?
>
>Priscilla
>
>
> >C
HI Jenny,
Is it safe to say that your problem is that when your non backbone area
becomes partitioned, you lose reachability to one side of the
partition? When you use large summarizes to describe entire areas and have
multiple entry points into those areas themselves, this is a normal
occur
what's funny?
At 10:49 AM 4/1/2002 -0500, James Haynes wrote:
>That's funny.
>
>--
>James Haynes
>Network Architect
>Cendant IT
>A+,MCSE,CCNA,CCDA,CCNP,CCDP,
>CQS-SNA/IPSS
>
>""David Wolsefer"" wrote in message
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Galina Pildush is publishing an MPL
in the picture is meant to indicate the logical IBGP connection, not a
physical link.
Pete
At 08:27 PM 3/27/2002 -0500, Peter van Oene wrote:
>Hi Hunt,
>
>A little cut and past here. For those reading along, it page 150 of version
>1.
>
>Router A (SJ) has only 1 physical connec
vice versa
>3. either of the above
>4. or none of the above?
>
>Thanks for your help :)
>Tarek
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
>Peter van Oene
>Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 7:31 PM
>To: Tarek
Hi Hunt,
A little cut and past here. For those reading along, it page 150 of version
1.
Router A (SJ) has only 1 physical connection which is to router B with an
IGP next hop of 3.3.3.3. In this example, Halabi is describing the
relationship between IGP and BGP next Hops. 2.2.2.0/24 is like
I fully agree with you. My personal opinion is that one validates one's
credibility in an email north of the name, not south.
pete
At 12:44 PM 3/25/2002 -0500, you wrote:
> > The reason I ask is due to the number of people on this list
> > that show CCNA, CCNP in their title.
>
>I list them al
ss VRF information up to the PE.
>
>Ken Sexton
>Data Network Engineering
>ICG Communications
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Peter van Oene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 10:39 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTE
I think you really need to mention that you are working on describing
RFC2547bis which happens to use MPLS as a forwarding mechanism. The
original question asked why BGP was required for MPLS for which the correct
answer is that it isn't.
At 11:05 AM 3/21/2002 -0500, Sexton, Ken wrote:
>MP-iB
,
>why
> > don't ISPs run that as their interior routing protocol?
> >
> > Jeffrey Reed
> > Classic Networking, Inc.
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
>Peter
> > van O
ess memory, less CPU etc. If this is correct, why
>don't ISPs run that as their interior routing protocol?
>
>Jeffrey Reed
>Classic Networking, Inc.
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Peter
>van Oene
>Sent: Sund
Really should read my own posts before I send them sometimes. I meant to
say one of either maximize convergence speed, or minimize convergence time,
but really said neither :)
At 08:34 PM 3/17/2002 -0500, Peter van Oene wrote:
>ISP's typically run one of IS-IS, or OSPF as their I
ISP's typically run one of IS-IS, or OSPF as their IGP's and manage only
link and loopback address space within it. IBGP is always fully meshed,
although most use tools like Route Reflection and Confederations to avoid
the n*(n-1)/2 scaling issues IBGP can present. Synchronization is an
ant
Most MPLS is implemented with shim headers (IE not filling VPI/VCI)
space. You should be able to learn all you want about mpls without ATM.
Pete
At 12:59 AM 3/17/2002 -0500, Tom Scott wrote:
>Reinhold,
>
>What did you use for the lab? I'd like to practice with MPLS but it
>appears that I'd ne
comments inline
At 02:32 AM 3/12/2002 -0500, Hunt Lee wrote:
>To ALL,
>
>I have 2 OSPF questions, it would be greatly appreciated if someone can shed
>some light on this.
>
>1) Does an OSPF Stub Area blocks Type 5 LSAs & Type 4 LSAs, or do they just
>block Type 5 LSAs?
Stub restricts both. Cons
You may have heard that about a default, but not a normal static. There
should be no issues with using static routes.
At 02:37 PM 3/9/2002 -0500, Ouellette, Tim wrote:
>Thought bgp had a gotcha where you couldn't start a neighbor relationship
>based on a static route.
>
>I'm fairly confident th
One thing to remember is that OSPF costs are calculated
unidirectionally. For example, A's cost to C could be very different from
C's cost to A. In general, IP traffic has to be engineered in both
directions and it for some networks asymmetry in flow might make sense. I
can't think of a rea
I would suggest that the renewed focus on improving this technology stems
from the widespread and sometimes confusing opinion that large scale layer
2 networks make sense. Many vendors are rapidly pushing ethernet metro
networks that leverage STP for resiliency. Those customers who have
impl
This really depends on whether or not they are pitching a Layer 2 VPN
service or a Layer 3 VPN service. With the former, there shouldn't be much
of any reconfig at your end as the transport mechanism with the SP will
remain transparent to you. With the latter, you'd would transition much of
Does anyone know of any issues using the IP helper-address and domain
browsing while using NAT?
I have 2 locations, CA and NJ.
CA has a connection to the internet, NJ does not. CA and NJ are connected
via a point-to-point link via their serial insterfaces. With the help of
NATting NJ now is able
Has anyone attended the new DQOS course?
This is the QoS course recommended for the new IP Telephony Specialist.
The other courses are CVOICE & CIPT.
What is it like, is it basically the IP QoS book plus QoS for VoIP?
Is it running in the UK yet?
Thanks
Peter
--
Peter Whittle
Mes
o sit the lab.
Peter
In article , Steven A. Ridder
writes
>try a 1750 or 1751.
>""Woods, Randall, SOBUS"" wrote in message
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Hi all,
>> I was wondering if anyone could give me some recommendations o
selects route learned
>from its iBGP peer over route learned via eBGP,
>and this route is eventualy inserted to routing table
>with administrative distance of 200
>
>
>Correct me if I am ovrlooking something,
>and thank you for excelent idea for testing.
>
>
>Przemek
>
ned route to choose
>from...
>
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Peter van Oene"
>To: "Przemyslaw Karwasiecki" ; "W. Alan Robertson"
>
>Cc: "Groupstudy - CCIELAB" ; "Groupstudy -
>Cisco Certification"
>Sent:
cisco by default prefers ebgp over ibgp. it should not, by default, enjoy
the ibgp routes learned from the peer over the ebgp learned routes.
At 05:37 PM 2/5/2002 -0500, Przemyslaw Karwasiecki wrote:
>Correct me if I am wrong but this:
>
> > if an iBGP peer learns that another iBGP peer alrea
Hello intervals are link specific. I'm not sure why varying hello timers
on different links would be relevant.
At 06:23 PM 2/4/2002 -0500, Walter Rogowski wrote:
>If you debug ospf adjacencies you might see complaints re mismatched
>hello intervals.
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL
Comments inline
At 05:31 PM 2/2/2002 -0500, Darrell Newcomb wrote:
>My subscription to the lab mailing list hasn't gone through yet so I
>figured I should post this question here. We know that in preparation
>most folks use various products to emulate a Frame Relay switch. Cisco
>also details t
Wouldn't surprise me at all that this is a bug. What IOS are you using?
Have you checked out the bug navigator? I just had a quick pass through,
but seeing as instead of actually searching for my keywords, the tool
ignores them and provides 500-1500 additional bugs to be "helpful", I was
una
how about doing what, for whom, where, and not to mention, most importantly
who?
or is the general consensus that the value an employee delivers to an
employer is directly proportional to the highest level of vendor specific
certification achieved?
At 01:26 PM 1/31/2002 -0500, Joe Carr wrote
No free TAC. However your cases are marked CCIE and usually handled by
something other than 1st level support
At 11:36 AM 1/31/2002 -0500, Joe Carr wrote:
>Does anyone know if a CCIE gets free TAC support? OR what other benefits
does
>a CCIE receive
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy
What are the current advantages for running ISL over 802.1q? I would
expect its proprietary nature to be enough to warrant choosing against it.
Pete
At 03:47 PM 1/30/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Is ISL still widely used? Are there still many shops out there using it? (I
>assume Cisco only outfits)
Why not simply prevent your customer routes from entering your IGP by the
normal means? Is there some relationship from BGP to the IGP in your
network that we may not be aware of?
Pete
At 02:57 PM 1/29/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi, Everyone: I saw some examples to use BGP private AS for si
Related to the subject of ethernet utilization, the following paper, while
dated, provides some interesting insight.
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~srini/current_class/readings/B+88.pdf
At 09:06 AM 1/27/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Priscilla is absolutely right, its a fuzzy question. I have just two
>th
I've seen ISP's assign /24's and /25's to loopbacks on dial boxes in order
to get the dial pools into the IGP. This is versus static routing them and
pushing them into the IGP via redistribution (into NSSA OSPF or ISIS
areas). I'm not pro either approach and prefer direct injects to BGP, but
TOS 0 specifies normal delivery in OSPF TOS based routing. There are 4
other defined classes of service, however, this concept never took off and
thus all OSPF routing takes place using TOS 0.
Research wise, I'd recommend you consider some primary source material if
your searching that dilige
itch); BVM for Basic rate ISDN;
or DVM for primary rate (either T1 or E1).
Peter
In article , Christian Arguello
writes
>Hi
>
>Does any body lnow if CISCO mc3810 support voip using h323 protocol, if so,
>with wich IOS does Cisco mc3810 works with VoIP. what do i have to do to
make
>
I like the M5 myself :)
At 10:24 PM 1/14/2002 -0500, Tony Medeiros wrote:
>Look at the 7120 and 7140 series. There are a couple of models that one or
>two built in DS-3 ports w/ built in CSU's. They are cheaper than a full
>blown 7200 and have a lot of nice features.
>See:
>http://www.cisco.co
Although I agree with you here, I'm not able to find a valid reason for the
inclusion of the D's interface to Net 3 in the cost from A. C should use
its own interface cost of 64 as the only cost to net 3 thereby returning a
cost of 69.
I'm of the opinion that this is a bug, or some wacky hand
I’m surprised they didn’t make you a ccie...
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=31696&t=31679
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure
Just for clarity, this really isn't a split horizon
implementation. Specifically, split horizon deals with prefix
advertisements directed out of interfaces from which they were originally
learned which is not what IBGP does. IBGP simply does not re advertise
prefixes learned from IBGP neigh
Vincent,
There is no "mechanism" needed. IBGP routers simply do not do this. You
don't need a mechanism to prevent something when the protocol isn't
designed to do it in the first place. On the contrary, you need a
mechanism to make IBGP advertise prefixes learned from IBGP neighbors which
worst.
>:-)
>
> >
> >Pete
> >
> >
> >At 09:32 AM 1/4/2002 -0600, Michael C. Popovich wrote:
> >>I have double checked on Documentation CD regarding IS-IS and the need
> >>for CLNS. Peter is definitely right in the fact that CLNS is not
> >>required
Totally depends on the platform/feature set you require. I expect most try
and stay in the S train, though MPLS pushes you to the ST train. Usually
folks talk to their cisco SE team and get a feel for which IOS is likely to
be the most stable. Definately most are in the 12 range now though I
Hmm.. Reading more, I think I made a mistake (there's a new one)
Anyway, Routers 1, 2, and 3 are BGP peers, however they connect via an IGP
domain that doesn't participate in BGP.
RT3 will learn of prefix X 4 times. Once from each ASBR via BGP with full
attributes intact. Once from each ASBR
Good find!
Some additional info. Per rfc 3166, RFC 1403, which obsoletes 1364, has
been moved to historic status since no one ever implemented it. This is
likely because redistributing BGP into your IGP really isn't a great idea
unless you'd like to see how fast you can dump your entire netw
AS-Macro's are an object in an RPSL based Internet Routing Registry (IRR)
that is used to simplify routing policy registration by grouping AS's. See
Ripe-181 (rfc 1786).
If you happen to build routing policies using RPSL, I expect you can write
policies around AS-Macros, though I've no experi
To my knowledge, this is purely a cisco implementation issue and you'd need
to look at the code or ask the coders what their particular intention
was. OSPF didn't play much of a role in transit networks during the time
when synchronization was a relevant option as far as I know so I doubt
the
301 - 400 of 961 matches
Mail list logo
