I have a strange problem; all my Microsoft XP Professional operating system
client computers are sending and receiving packets continues (Ethernet
Adapter light blinks continues) which are connected to Cisco switch, but if
I connect to normal hub or 3com switch, it stops, I checked with sniffer
cisco switch [7:65670]
Try using the switch command: show mac
you should get an output similar to this:
switch_named#sh mac
Dynamic Address Count: 215
Secure Address Count: 0
Static Address (User-defined) Count: 0
System Self Address Count: 47
Total
aware if other switches are connected to that port.
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: David Ristau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 10:52 AM
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Finding device on network via cisco switch [7:65670]
>&g
IL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Finding device on network via cisco switch [7:65670]
>
>
> given an IP address and a MAC address, how can I use my cisco
> switch to
> identify which port an unknown device is attached to ?
>
> can I view the switching table cache entries ?
>
>
quot;David Ristau"" wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> given an IP address and a MAC address, how can I use my cisco switch to
> identify which port an unknown device is attached to ?
>
> can I view the switching table cache entries ?
>
> I've got an IP dev
,
Angel
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David Ristau
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 10:52 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Finding device on network via cisco switch [7:65670]
given an IP address and a MAC address, how can I use my cisco
given an IP address and a MAC address, how can I use my cisco switch to
identify which port an unknown device is attached to ?
can I view the switching table cache entries ?
I've got an IP device on the network and nobody seems to know where it is.
heh!
given a catalyst 3500XL running
Hi all,
I think we covered this a little while ago, but don't recall the outcome.
I have been using a cheap netgear 8 port 10/100 switch at home for ages (no
fan=quiet) and it goes ok. Recently, I have swapped out the netgear for the
CAT5K from my lab. I am using it for CIT study and also because
en: zaterdag 21 september 2002 20:44
Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Onderwerp: Re: Off Topic - Quietest Cisco Switch [7:53800]
***they're all VERY quiet when you unplug 'em! :->
-->Very very true, but what's the fun of having a killer home network unless
you put it to good use. F
>Hello,
>
> If you are willing to spend a few dollars, you can buy a quieter
>fan than those Cisco uses at most computer shows.
>
> Of course, the reason why fans make noise is the turbulence coming
>off the edges. I have a design for a fan with no edges that should run
>almost complet
Hello,
If you are willing to spend a few dollars, you can buy a quieter
fan than those Cisco uses at most computer shows.
Of course, the reason why fans make noise is the turbulence coming
off the edges. I have a design for a fan with no edges that should run
almost completely si
I have to imagine a 1548 is quiet.
""Charlie Wehner"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I'm looking to buy a switch for my apartment. (Right now, the 2950T
24port
> 10/100/1000Base-T looks promising.)
>
> However, the amount of noise this thing produces is a conce
Charlie Wehner wrote:
>
> I'm looking to buy a switch for my apartment. (Right now, the
> 2950T 24port 10/100/1000Base-T looks promising.)
>
> However, the amount of noise this thing produces is a concern.
> I want to put it in my living room (Actually, it's the only
> room... I live in a stud
***they're all VERY quiet when you unplug 'em! :->
-->Very very true, but what's the fun of having a killer home network unless
you put it to good use. For example, right now, I'm hosting 2 websites and
let my friends VPN-in and download/upload interesting freeware
applications. :)(Stuff li
>
> Thinking outside of the "box."
>
> Adam
> - Original Message -
> From: "Charlie Wehner"
> To:
> Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 8:42 AM
> Subject: Off Topic - Quietest Cisco Switch [7:53800]
>
>
> > I'm loo
Here's an idea. Unplug it when it's not in use. Copy run start is there
for a reason.
Thinking outside of the "box."
Adam
- Original Message -
From: "Charlie Wehner"
To:
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 8:42 AM
Subject: Off Topic - Quietest Cisco Sw
they're all VERY quiet when you unplug 'em! :->
seriously, I presume your home lab is not mission critical. Is there any
reason it has to run 24x7?Turning things off, and powering up only when you
want to put in some serious rack time ( as opposed to reading, then casually
trying a couple of thin
ginal Message -
From: "Thomas Larus"
To:
Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 12:22 AM
Subject: Re: Off Topic - Quietest Cisco Switch [7:53800]
I can narrow down the field by telling you that my Catalyst 2828-EN (2820
series-- modular brother of the 1900-series) is NOT quiet. Mine makes
I can narrow down the field by telling you that my Catalyst 2828-EN (2820
series-- modular brother of the 1900-series) is NOT quiet. Mine makes so
much noise I avoided using it (and my Cat 5000), and used a combination of
quieter 3Com switch, 3Com hub, and crossover cables. This was a mistake an
I'm looking to buy a switch for my apartment. (Right now, the 2950T 24port
10/100/1000Base-T looks promising.)
However, the amount of noise this thing produces is a concern. I want to
put it in my living room (Actually, it's the only room... I live in a
studio.) so I can't have this thing crank
That 01-00-0C-CC-CC-CD multicast destination address is used by Cisco for
their Per-VLAN Spanning Tree Plus (PVST+). Here's what I have heard:
802.1Q supports a single spanning tree for all VLANs in the campus network,
(unless that has changed). This is sometimes called Mono Spanning Tree or
M
Has anyone ever these packets on their network before? I am getting about 3
a sec. I traced the port to a 3500XL but when I do a show mac it isn't
there. I thought it might be cdp so I disabled that but it is still there.
I thought it was wierd.
cisco prefix
00-07-EB (hex)C
It is possible to establish trunk between cisco and non-cisco
switch, but:
1. Only 802.1q trunk
2. No dynamic negotiation is possible. You have to hard code
trunk as "ON", and you have to disable DISL with "nonegotiate".
Sasa
CCIE #8635
bergenpeak wrote:
>
> Is
Is it possible to establish a DISL trunk between a cisco switch
and a non-cisco switch?
If so, how would one configure the port on the cisco switch side?
Thanks
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=32757&
packet loss on Cisco
switch
> 2924XL and 2940XL.
>
> I found that the cisco switch "drops" packet. It is more serious on 2940XL.
> Is
> there any switch mode I have mis-configure? Or it is a known bug on the
> switchs?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Francis
--
David
Just checking if anyone has experience regarding packet loss on Cisco switch
2924XL and 2940XL.
I found that the cisco switch "drops" packet. It is more serious on 2940XL.
Is
there any switch mode I have mis-configure? Or it is a known bug on the
switchs?
Thanks.
Francis
Message
lf Of
king kaung
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2001 7:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: apple machine and cisco switch problem [7:20825]
Hi All,
I have big problem with our apple machines. Last week, I replaced my old
3Com switches to cisco 3524 switches. Then most of my apple machine can
not
Moe, this is just an idea but after a situation at our campus I will
share it. Try preventing the mac from "auto negotiating" to 100 full.
Set the NIC and switch port to 100 half manual and check the results.
king kaung wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I have big problem with our apple machines. Last week,
Turn on portfast, which causes a switch port to go into forwarding mode
more quickly. I bet the Macintoshes didn't receive AppleTalk parameters
correctly because the switch port didn't start forwarding while they were
booting and starting up AppleTalk.
Priscilla
At 07:01 AM 9/23/01, king kaun
They also have to all be in the same vlan unless you're routing AppleTalk
across your vlans.
""king kaung"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi All,
>
> I have big problem with our apple machines. Last week, I replaced my old
> 3Com switches to cisco 3524 switches
They also have to all be in the same vlan unless you're routing AppleTalk
across your vlans.
""king kaung"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi All,
>
> I have big problem with our apple machines. Last week, I replaced my old
> 3Com switches to cisco 3524 switches
.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
king kaung
Sent: Sunday, September 23, 2001 7:02 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: apple machine and cisco switch problem [7:20825]
Hi All,
I have big problem with our apple machines. Last week, I replaced my
Hi All,
I have big problem with our apple machines. Last week, I replaced my old
3Com switches to cisco 3524 switches. Then most of my apple machine can not
see each other(cannot access appleshare)but it can see and can access PC
Servers. I try to configure the speed and duplex according apple
Hi all,
I have a lot of Cisco-Switches and a lot of workstations and sersers on
the switchports. If I use the mac-table on the switch then I find out:
which mac-address is on which port. With this information I find out:
which IP-Address is on which port.
Do you have an idea to create an automat
Hi~
I have some problems. I wanna get good answer from you professional.
We're using the Catalyst 2948G-L3, and there put 2 kinds of Network on the
same interface.
In other words, Primary IP and Secondary IP.
But we cannot find another host on each PC.
In other words, we cannot see hosts located i
hello,
Is anybody in the market to sell an affordable cisco
switch. The only requirements are that it's in good
working condition & the ports must be
autosensing-capable. 24 ports would be preferrable.
Please respond if you are willing to sell a switch
Hi, sombody try a trunk between Cisco switch 6509 and Extreme switch
BLACKDIAMOND 6808 to propagate cisco VTP domain ?
thanks in advanced
--
Federico Díaz Herrera
Lógistica y Proyectos
Departamento de Redes y Telecomunicaciones
The Layer3 version is different from Cat OS.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Kevin Wigle
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 12:01 AM
To: Cisco
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Rép. : Cisco Switch 2948G-L3 Question
Ok, as I said I
g gets you there to)
>
> Not sure this helps, I don't have a 2948G-L3 to play with but if it has
the
> same IOS as the Cat 5000 this should apply.
>
> Kevin Wigle
> CCDP/CCNP........
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Thierry MARTIN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To
Cat 5000 this should apply.
>
> Kevin Wigle
> CCDP/CCNP
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Thierry MARTIN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, 04 November, 2000 12:44
>
to play with but if it has the
same IOS as the Cat 5000 this should apply.
Kevin Wigle
CCDP/CCNP
- Original Message -
From: "Thierry MARTIN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, 04 November, 2000 12:44
hello,
Cisco switch 2948-L3 are IOS and each VLAN must be considere as Virtual Bridge.
For VLAN 1, each port must have command "bridge-group 1"
and you do create a BVI with number 1.
The ip address for this VLNA will be in the BVI interface.
Is it a configuration BRIDGE IRB.
Your c
Yeah I'm using IRB and the port 48 is still in Bridge Group 2
Manoj Ghorpade
Rodgers Moore wrote:
Are
you using IRB? and did you remove port 48 from bridge group 2? Rodgers
Moore
"Manoj
Ghorpade" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...Hi
Group,
I have a Cisco 2948G-L3 s
Are you using IRB? and did you remove port 48
from bridge group 2?
Rodgers Moore
"Manoj Ghorpade" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...Hi Group, I have a Cisco 2948G-L3 switch and want to setup
the management on the switch.I tried doing things the documentati
ED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: CISCO SWITCH
>Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 08:24:05 EDT
>
>What happens if the Autoswitch fails? Ahh, the joys of fault tolerance:)
>
>
>Original Message Follows
>From: "Lance Hubbard" <[EMAIL PR
Alteon also makes a product that I believe does this type of failover.
Brian
**NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
_
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.
What happens if the Autoswitch fails? Ahh, the joys of fault tolerance:)
Original Message Follows
From: "Lance Hubbard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Lance Hubbard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: CISCO SWITCH
Date: Mon,
; >
> > Pushkar Shirolkar wrote:
> >
> > > hi,
> > >
> > > i have a requirement that says that i need to have a redundant cisco
> switch
> > > .. i.e. there is a LAN and the if the switch fails .. the other switch
> > > should take over.
TECTED]> wrote in message
8rt3fo$c71$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:8rt3fo$c71$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> hi,
>
> i have a requirement that says that i need to have a redundant cisco
switch
> .. i.e. there is a LAN and the if the switch fails .. the other switch
> should take over. this is
tion.html
> These cards do work under linux/unix but takes a bit of configuration to
get
> it to work.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Bharat Suneja [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 8:50 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: CISCO SWITC
LOL! That's great!!
>From: Iohan Reyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: CISCO SWITCH
>Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 20:47:05 -0400
>
>As a friend of mine used to say... "Pardon my innocence".
: Monday, October 09, 2000 8:50 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CISCO SWITCH
If you use dual-port NICs you can configure them to have the same IP address
as a part of a Fault Tolerant Team (Intel Pro 100 dual-port NICs).
Bharat Suneja
"Iohan Reyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote i
g about backbone switches, that to is a matter of having
2
> >large switches and running 1 cable from each to each closet pairr of
> >switches.
> >
> >
> >- Original Message -
> >From: "Iohan Reyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "Pushka
switcheswhat mechanism would you
>use
> > to do the failover then - Spanning-Tree, RIP?
> >
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> > Pushkar Shirolkar
> > Sent: Monday, October 0
heers,
Lance
>From: "Ejay Hire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "Ejay Hire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: CISCO SWITCH
>Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 17:20:04 CDT
>
>A better solution is
Plant,
or Weapons of Mass Destruction Facility.
Original Message Follows
From: "Iohan Reyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Iohan Reyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Pushkar Shirolkar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE:
a matter of having 2
>large switches and running 1 cable from each to each closet pairr of
>switches.
>
>
>- Original Message -
>From: "Iohan Reyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Pushkar Shirolkar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Pushkar Shirolkar
> Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 7:36 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: CISCO SWITCH
>
>
> hi,
> thanx for the reply .
> but i want the switch failover solution .. not the backbone failover ..
what
> if the switc
Of
Pushkar Shirolkar
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2000 7:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: CISCO SWITCH
hi,
thanx for the reply .
but i want the switch failover solution .. not the backbone failover .. what
if the switch itself fails .. does it failover to another switch ... does it
have an
pro's and con's
associated
> to it.
>
> Pushkar Shirolkar wrote:
>
> > hi,
> >
> > i have a requirement that says that i need to have a redundant cisco
switch
> > .. i.e. there is a LAN and the if the switch fails .. the other switch
> > should take over. thi
e:
> hi,
>
> i have a requirement that says that i need to have a redundant cisco switch
> .. i.e. there is a LAN and the if the switch fails .. the other switch
> should take over. this is possible in the cisco 6000 series of switches ...
> but is there some lower end soluti
hi,
i have a requirement that says that i need to have a redundant cisco switch
.. i.e. there is a LAN and the if the switch fails .. the other switch
should take over. this is possible in the cisco 6000 series of switches ...
but is there some lower end solution .. that costs less and also my
On 6 Oct 2000 20:34:41 -0400, emirates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:I have one 3524 with 2 GBIC and one 2924 with 2 100baseFX ports. I can't
:able to connect both switches using fiber. I couldn't identify the
:problem yet. Any suggestion/help will hightly appreciated !!
GBICs are gigabit (1000 me
> emirates wrote:
> I have one 3524 with 2 GBIC and one 2924 with 2 100baseFX ports. I
> can't able to connect both switches using fiber. I couldn't identify
> the problem yet. Any suggestion/help will hightly appreciated !!
You're trying to connect a GBIC to 100FX, which will not work. Fiber
l
Hi,
I have one 3524 with 2 GBIC and one 2924 with 2
100baseFX ports. I can't able to connect both switches using fiber. I
couldn't identify the problem yet. Any suggestion/help will hightly appreciated
!!
AA
jeongwoo park
ahoo.com>cc:
Sent by: Subject: Is this corre
Welch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "jeongwoo park" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Groupstudy"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2000 6:32 PM
Subject: RE: Is this correct in cisco switch?
> That comment is not totally correct. Some access layer switches
Sent: Monday, August 21, 2000 4:21 PM
> To: Groupstudy
> Subject: Is this correct in cisco switch?
>
>
> HI all
> Is this comment correct?
> Comment:
> All access layer switches take only IOS based command.
> All distribution layer switches take only set based
> command?
HI all
Is this comment correct?
Comment:
All access layer switches take only IOS based command.
All distribution layer switches take only set based
command?
Could someone clarify this?
Thanks in adv.
jeongwoo
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Free
Group,
could anybody guide me about what these entries are and how would you
troubleshoot them if you see any trace of errors on any item below.
Thanks
Rayza
AirpaxSEED2924c#show controllers ethernet-controllerTransmit FastEthernet0/2
Receive
472593821 Bytes 76
eep Kulkarni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 9:25 PM
Subject: Re: Cisco Switch 4006
> Something that comes to mind is you have more than
one power supply
> installed and one isn't plugged in. Is that the
case?
>
> Chri
Something that comes to mind is you have more than one power supply
installed and one isn't plugged in. Is that the case?
Chris M.
- Original Message -
From: "Sandeep Kulkarni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 1:07 PM
Hi All,
I have a cisco Cat 4006 newly installed. The switch is
working absolutly fine except the show module command
shows me the supervisor module is faulty. I have
attached the show module command out put & show
version command output. Is this some kind of bug with
Cisco 4006???
Regards
Sandee
73 matches
Mail list logo
