this is the current nat setup I have on one of my PIXs:
global (outside) 1 xxx.xxx.223.235-64.172.223.236
global (outside) 1 xxx.xxx.223.237
nat (inside) 0 access-list 100
nat (inside) 1 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 0 0
heres the translations:
PAT Global xxx.xxx.223.237(16882) Local 192.168.2.18(2193)
I have been following this thread with great interest, for I had
problems with PAT/NAT in IOS recently. It looks to me that many people have
the same confusions (hopes) as I had.
I have a case where I have many users on private address space
(around 1000 or so) which must be NAT-ed through
start doing
NAT???
I'm still confused... I really appreciate all the
answers to this question, but some answers says the
opposite can we make it clear??
Thank you!!!
--- Peter Walker escribis: >
According to my experience you have got it the wrong
> way round.
>
According to my experience you have got it the wrong way round.
Cisco IOS will do NAT until the pool runs out, then do PAT on the last IP.
This was a major issue when then documentation suggested the opposite. Not
sure if this is still the case though.
Peter
--On 03 April 2003 07:50 +
You should be able to use your normal pool and overload command,
eg ip nat inside source list 1 pool POOL overload,
You pool, for eg is 192.168.0.60->10.168.0.99, then the first 39 IP's would
be used for NAT, and the last will be use for PAT
=?iso-8859-1?q?ciscoGo2002?= wrote:
>
> Hello friend
Hello friends,
Thankyou for your answeres, but I have more doubts:
Config:
ip nat inside source list 1 pool POOL overload
If have understood your answers, the router start
doing PAT with the first IP address and doesn't takes
the next avalaible public IP address until PAT is
exhauste
The source address of the packet(host address) is replaced with one of the
addresses in the natpool. That is contained in the header of the packet.
The routing protocol takes care of insuring that the packet gets back to
your WAN interface. Hope this helps.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groups
osnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 8:55 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Confused over NAT [7:65926]
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> Just having a slight problem getting my head around NAT regarding the
> example configurations in the study guides
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Confused over NAT [7:65926]
Dear all,
Just having a slight problem getting my head around NAT regarding the
example configurations in the study guides I have.
access-list 1 permit 10.0.0.1 0.0.0.255 (defines list of addresses)
ip nat pool mynatpool 222.2.2.1
Ok, I think I have it now. So in a way the pool of addresses are like a load
of virtual interfaces?
I understand the use of sockets for overloading and how this can enable to
use just one address, it was just the pool thing that confused me a little!
Thanks guys, James.
Message Posted at:
http
Nat replaces the inside IP with a/the real IP from it's outside pool. It
keeps track of which inside device each NAT'd (is that a word?) packet
belongs to via the port it assigns to the packet when it puts the outside IP
addy on it and sends it.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form
?
Confused from London
Regards, James.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=65926&t=65926
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondi
That is really funny.
-Original Message-
From: Godswill Oletu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 03 December 2002 14:50
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I seems Confused.Peer-to-to TCP/IP Network [7:58255]
Hi Mark and All!
This is to thank everyone who responded or think through
security
modules still loads in the services. So it drops all traffics.
Thanks once again.
Regards.
Godswill
- Original Message -
From: Mark W. Odette II
To:
Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 2:03 PM
Subject: RE: I seems Confused.Peer-to-to TCP/IP Network [7:58255]
> Oletu-
> Wh
d then NAT it again from
>computer A downstream (I have not reached here), I do not think the presense
>of two NICs in each computer would have any thing to do with thei.
>
>Thanks men!
>Godswill
>
>
>- Original Message -
>From: Mark W. Odette II
>To:
>Sent
. :
Lease Expires . . . . . . . :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Thanks man!
Regards.
Godswill
- Original Message -
From: Symon Thurlow
To: Godswill Oletu ;
Sent: Friday
I have just one NT system at home.
- Original Message -
From: Symon Thurlow
To:
Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 5:15 PM
Subject: RE: I seems Confused.Peer-to-to TCP/IP Network [7:58255]
> Does another WINNT system talk to the other one?
>
> -Original Message---
. :
Lease Expires . . . . . . . :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
Thanks man!
Regards.
Godswill
- Original Message -
From: Symon Thurlow
To: Godswill Oletu ;
Sent: Friday
Does another WINNT system talk to the other one?
-Original Message-
From: Godswill Oletu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 29 November 2002 21:45
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I seems Confused.Peer-to-to TCP/IP Network [7:58255]
Hi Mark,
So far...
I brought in another Win98
November 2002 20:43
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I seems Confused.Peer-to-to TCP/IP Network [7:58255]
Hi Mark,
Actually before now I had been checking the routing table 'route print'
and also the netbios cache. On Computer A with IP address 192.168.0.1,
there is a route to network 1
Followup...
WinNT System have Service pack 6 installed.
Regards.
- Original Message -
From: Mark W. Odette II
To:
Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 2:03 PM
Subject: RE: I seems Confused.Peer-to-to TCP/IP Network [7:58255]
> Oletu-
> What you are trying to do is not impo
.
Godswill
- Original Message -
From: Mark W. Odette II
To:
Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 2:03 PM
Subject: RE: I seems Confused.Peer-to-to TCP/IP Network [7:58255]
> Oletu-
> What you are trying to do is not impossible. Many of us do this all the
> time to migrate data
h computer would have any thing to do with thei.
Thanks men!
Godswill
- Original Message -
From: Mark W. Odette II
To:
Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 2:03 PM
Subject: RE: I seems Confused.Peer-to-to TCP/IP Network [7:58255]
> Oletu-
> What you are trying to do is not impossible
sibility.
Good luck, and let us know what you find...
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Godswill Oletu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, November 29, 2002 12:04 PM
To: Mark W. Odette II; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I seems Confused.Peer-to-to TCP/IP Network [7:58255]
Hi Mar
, November 28, 2002 8:22 PM
Subject: RE: I seems Confused.Peer-to-to TCP/IP Network [7:58255]
> Check your subnet masks for each computer.
> Either specify Computer B as the default gateway for Computer A and
> vice-versa, or don't specify a default gateway at all.
>
> After that, y
riginal Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Godswill Oletu
Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 7:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: I seems Confused.Peer-to-to TCP/IP Network [7:58255]
Hi all,
Where are mine going wrong? Has anyone implemented a Peer-
ickly).
Verify that your cross-over cable is good, or plug each computer into a
hub/switch.
It's that simple.
Cheers!
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Godswill Oletu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2002 6:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: I seems Confused.Peer
Hi all,
Where are mine going wrong? Has anyone implemented a Peer-to-Peer network
involving just two computers with ONLY TCP/IP Protocol?
I have been trying to do it but keeping failing. NetBEUI is working fine, I
can transfer files in between both computers. But TCP/IP protocolis not
working acr
Greetings,
I wonder if anyone has managed to successfully setup a VPN between a Cisco
PIX
and Microsoft ISA firewall? I am confused about the "Windows will not do
tunneling" statements and also the (apparent) lack of direct ipsec
configuration in ISA.
I did find articles on
gt; > Priscilla
> >
> > Peter Kingston wrote:
> > >
> > > I just as a little bit of friendly rivalry,
> > >
> > > I believe there is more than yourself confused in London,
> > > naming your
> > > cricketers 5 zips looks li
; > Well you better explain this to us Yankees. Our baseball season is over
> > unfortunatley, and now all we have is football (ugh). Well we have hockey
> > and basketball too, I guess, and they're a litte better! :-)
> >
> > Priscilla
> >
> > Peter Kingston wrote
> Our baseball season is over
> unfortunatley, and now all we have is football (ugh).
Priscilla!!! How dare you, on the eve of the UMich/Ohio State game?!?!
;-)
BJ
(Go Blue!!)
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=57818&t=57780
---
> Peter Kingston wrote:
> >
> > I just as a little bit of friendly rivalry,
> >
> > I believe there is more than yourself confused in London,
> > naming your
> > cricketers 5 zips looks like a fair chance
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> >
lry,
>
> I believe there is more than yourself confused in London,
> naming your
> cricketers 5 zips looks like a fair chance
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Peter Kingston
> Telstra BigPond Direct
> Freecall 1800 066 594
> wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I just as a little bit of friendly rivalry,
I believe there is more than yourself confused in London, naming your
cricketers 5 zips looks like a fair chance
--
Regards,
Peter Kingston
Telstra BigPond Direct
Freecall 1800 066 594
wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL P
Someone asked me a question which confused me:-
If i ping a network broadcast from a host on a different network, which
passes through a cisco router why do i get replies from certain devices.
The router has directed broadcast forwarding disabled.
I thought the router would therefore drop the
Tom Martin wrote:
> Robert,
>
> I believe that your diagram should reflect R1's serial interface to R2
> as s0/1 instead of s0/0. This caused me some confusion in trying to
> figure out the configs. Actually, there is still some confusion given
Sorry for that - this was copy-pasting error (ther
.66.0/25 is directly connected,
> Serial0/0
>
> We see that an update about 172.16.200.0 was received from
> 172.16.66.1 (secondary of serial interface of R1) and installed in
> route table. But the netmask was chosen not as I expected: not /25
> subnet locally configured on s0
-match rule was applied and /29
mask
configured on one of subinterfaces won.
This behaviour get me confused. Doyle vol.1 doesn't even mention of choosing
masks on receive (this is a great book but lacks of little-funny-details by
the
way), and even more detailed and full of algorithms Zinin&#
EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:nobody@;groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> supernet
> Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 9:39 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: ciscoworks 2000 confused [7:56045]
>
>
> I'm confused on how to manage network devices. Under Server
> Configuration, there is ANI server
I'm confused on how to manage network devices. Under Server
Configuration, there is ANI server admin. I can discover all network
devices. But what does RME do? Are they the same thing? Do I have to
manually add each device to RME?
Thanks.
Yoshi
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstud
ncerely.
>
>
>
>
>
>>From: Melody Green
>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Subject: Re: Even more confused: Was: New CCIE Lab Policy?? Why??
>>[7:55019] (EVA-Lite Redirect)
>>Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 14:57:14 -0400
>>
>>Hi,
>>
>>The policy is tha
from [EMAIL PROTECTED] for resolving this right
away.
Sincerely.
>From: "Frank Merrill"
>Reply-To: "Frank Merrill"
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Even more confused: Was: New CCIE Lab Policy?? [7:55046]
>Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 20:05:04 GMT
>
>Hmm.
Hmm...
I don't see where it says one year, I do see that it says 18 months, and
then within 12 months after the first attempt (if failed of course).
fgm
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=55055&t=55046
--
FAQ, list a
ject: Re: Even more confused: Was: New CCIE Lab Policy?? Why??
>[7:55019] (EVA-Lite Redirect)
>Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 14:57:14 -0400
>
>Hi,
>
>The policy is that candidates must make their first lab attempt within 18
>months of passing their written exam. Can you provide me
Hello,
Now I am even more confused:
Based on the link that Dennis put out:
www.cisco.com/cco.shtml
It pulls up the previous Cisco web-page which states on the CCIE Lab policy
page:
3.Written Exam Expiry
Candidates must attempt the CCIE Lab exam within 18 months of passing the
CCIE
bserve the results.
> > 7. Do problem symptoms stop?
> >
> > If no, go back to 4 or possibly to 2.
> > If yes, problem resolved, document the results.
> >
> > OK, off my soapbox now! :-)
> >
> > ___
> >
> > Priscilla
t; it apply the new setting at the transport level?
> Thanks!
> GM
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Chuck's Long Road [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 4:00 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Confused about MTU size [7:54689]
>
>
--Original Message-
From: Chuck's Long Road
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 1:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: Confused about MTU size [7:54689]
Wh
you end up
changing it to? Also: Although MTU is set at the application level, doesn't
it apply the new setting at the transport level?
Thanks!
GM
-Original Message-
From: Chuck's Long Road [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 4:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
S
> with email.
> >
> > I know in our situation, I had to add the mail server name & IP
> > to the host
> > file of the remote pc. Some times we experience some latency,
> > but for the
> > most part it's only been about half a minute.
> >
> > Che
change and Outlook Client Connections Through a
Firewall"
-Original Message-
From: JohnZ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 6:55 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Confused
forward to hearing a resolution.
Gotta get back to work, myself, though. ;-)
___
Priscilla Oppenheimer
www.troubleshootingnetworks.com
www.priscilla.com
>
> I don't have time now, but I think this could be the issue. I
> think it
> may be an end station problem.
>
iven segment.
> >
> > Anyone willing to modify their end station to force an MTU of
> 576 and
> > discovery of "blackholes" and report the results.
> >
> > It would be most insightful to see the pre and post registry
> network
> > sniffer traces of
ld be most insightful to see the pre and post registry network
> sniffer traces of Outlook traffic.
>
> I don't have time now, but I think this could be the issue. I think it
> may be an end station problem.
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Larry Letterman [mailto:[
the host
> file of the remote pc. Some times we experience some latency,
> but for the
> most part it's only been about half a minute.
>
> Cheers,
> mkj
>
> -Original Message-
> From: JohnZ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002
nd post registry network
sniffer traces of Outlook traffic.
I don't have time now, but I think this could be the issue. I think it
may be an end station problem.
-Original Message-
From: Larry Letterman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 7:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTEC
duct test once. And that was
>what we saw - all worked (http, proxy, etc.) but Exchange was gone. Turned
>out to be some Checkpoint and access-list tweaking.
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: JohnZ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 5:43 PM
>T
e was gone. Turned
out to be some Checkpoint and access-list tweaking.
-Original Message-
From: JohnZ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 5:43 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Confused about MTU size [7:54689]
Thanks Priscilla, I definitely don't mind
a touchy thing... Especially when dealing
> > with M$
> > 0utlook. Are you sure it's the MTU size that's the problem
> > with email.
> >
> > I know in our situation, I had to add the mail server name & IP
> > to the host
> > file of the remote pc. So
al Message-----
> From: JohnZ [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 8:55 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Confused about MTU size [7:54689]
>
>
> Can some one explain clearly how does MTU size affect windows
> applications
> where these appli
Can some one explain clearly how does MTU size affect windows applications
where these applications won't work over a network link. I have a certain
home user that can establish a vpn tunnel through a DSL to corporate network
and all applications will work except for email. The only difference is
uying a Catalyst 5509 for the core of our network, I
> am however confused by the part numbers I will need.
>
> I need about 12 + Gigabit Ethernet (Copper) ports, 48 10/100BaseT ports,
> a GBIC uplink to some 2950G-EIs we have, and an RSM to provide intervlan
> routing.
>
> Ca
True chuck, comments below...
--- Chuck's Long Road wrote:
> Good points, Erik - some thoughts below:
snipp for brevety
> CL: according to the specs, the 4006 has a 64 gig
> backplane, superior to the
> 65xx's advertised 32 gig out of the box.
Also, take the Mpps numbers into consideration.
gt; sup4
> > would help. I've seen other companys also have
> > problems when using 4006 as a core/data-center
> device
> > with a good amount of servers attached.
> >
> > > CL: OR... I gotta keep brining this up -
> depending
> > > on the applications and
>
Buy a 4003/4006...the 5000 will be overdriven after 2 or 3 gig ports are
in use...
especially for the core of the network...
Stuart Pittwood wrote:
>I am looking into buying a Catalyst 5509 for the core of our network, I
>am however confused by the part numbers I will need.
>
>I n
ations and
> > traffic flows, a 3550-12G and a cou-ple of 3550-48's
> > might just do the
> > trick. The 12G is L3 out of the box.
>
> Agreed, or some other vendors box that isn't as pricy
> as the 6500 series (Extreme, Foundry).
>
> > > -Original M
8's
> > might just do the
> > trick. The 12G is L3 out of the box.
>
> Agreed, or some other vendors box that isn't as pricy
> as the 6500 series (Extreme, Foundry).
CL: hush. this is a Cisco list ;->
>
> > > -Original Message-
ining this up - depending
> on the applications and
> traffic flows, a 3550-12G and a cou-ple of 3550-48's
> might just do the
> trick. The 12G is L3 out of the box.
Agreed, or some other vendors box that isn't as pricy
as the 6500 series (Extreme, Foundry).
> > ---
ou-ple of 3550-48's might just do the
trick. The 12G is L3 out of the box.
> -Original Message-
> From: Stuart Pittwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 2:12 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Confused about Catalyst part numbers [7:5443
I would think about going with a 6509, the 5500 series has been eol'd, but
the last support dates are a while away yet.
-Original Message-
From: Stuart Pittwood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 2:12 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Confused about Cat
I am looking into buying a Catalyst 5509 for the core of our network, I
am however confused by the part numbers I will need.
I need about 12 + Gigabit Ethernet (Copper) ports, 48 10/100BaseT ports,
a GBIC uplink to some 2950G-EIs we have, and an RSM to provide intervlan
routing.
Can anyone
hi
EBGP is used when u are going to have communication between two autonomos
systems or when u have multihoming to different ISPs or ur network is acting
as a transient AS.
Now IBGP is used when u want to have the knowledge of the external AS
routes in ur network. In that also routers will not p
CL: about the only example, these days. anyone ever seen any documentation
of the protocol EGP on CCO?
>
> The reason I am confused is because of iBGP, eBGP and also external EIGRP.
> Now I am quoting from Sybex "The internal Border Gateway Protocols used by
> routers that all belong to
am confused is because of iBGP, eBGP and also external EIGRP.
Now I am quoting from Sybex "The internal Border Gateway Protocols used by
routers that all belong to the same AS. So where does iBGP fits in. Is it an
IGP or EGP? Similarly what is external EIGRP? Even an important question
will b
hives.
>
> ~-Original Message-
> ~From: William Lijewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> ~Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 10:22 AM
> ~To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ~Subject: 2 questions I'm confused about [7:42739]
> ~
> ~
> ~Hello all,
> ~
> ~I have 2 quick topics I
ewski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
~Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2002 10:22 AM
~To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
~Subject: 2 questions I'm confused about [7:42739]
~
~
~Hello all,
~
~I have 2 quick topics I could use some clarification on:
~
~1) There is a new command for 12.2 called
~
~PPP MULTILINK LOAD-
Not for sure about question #1.
Question #2, the first statement would advertise the network 180.4.4.0/24
including all addresses from 180.4.4.0 - 180.4.4.255. The second command
would only advertise the host 180.4.4.4.
HTH,
Mike W.
"William Lijewski" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:
Hello all,
I have 2 quick topics I could use some clarification on:
1) There is a new command for 12.2 called
PPP MULTILINK LOAD-THRESHOLD
What is the difference between this command and DIALER LOAD-THRESHOLD, and
when would I use one over the other?
2) In OSPF you can advertise the newtwork
I am studying for my CSS-1. The one area I am
struggling with is IPsec and IKE. I took an example
from Cramsession.com's MCNS study guide. There are
similiar examples in the MCNS Cisco press book and the
PIX advanced CIsco Press book.
Here are the IPsec commands:
crypto ipsec trasform-set test
I think you're still confused. Both physical frame interface
and multipoint sub-interface are by default OSPF Non_Broadcast type.
This means for OSPF to function you'd need to configure neighbor command
in either scenario.
With the config you showed on RTA (the HUB router) you wouldn
"Cisco Nuts" >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: More Confused!!! Re: Neighbor commands...Yes or No?? [7:33547]
>Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 01:38:45 -0500 > >Hello!! > >I am even more
confused now! :-( > >Just finished configuring 3 routers in a FR
hub-and-spoke topology
Hello!!
I am even more confused now! :-(
Just finished configuring 3 routers in a FR hub-and-spoke topology with
OSPF in the default non-broadcast mode with NO neighbor commands on the
hub router and FR map commands on both the spokes to get to one another.
It works!! I mean without the
I think this is a good primer for some of your questions.
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/ip_c
/ipcprt2/1cdospf.htm
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=31242&t=31096
--
FAQ, li
At 12:16 PM -0500 1/7/02, Andy Leaning wrote:
>I'm currently studying for this exam too so I could well be wrong,
>forgive me if I am...
>
>My understanding is that the dr and bdr are there to reduce
>LSA traffic when there are numerous routers on a shared network
>- instead of everyone talking to
I'm currently studying for this exam too so I could well be wrong,
forgive me if I am...
My understanding is that the dr and bdr are there to reduce
LSA traffic when there are numerous routers on a shared network
- instead of everyone talking to everyone it's everyone to a dr.
On a point to poin
Don't let the unicast/multicast thing throw you off. What matters here is
the "point-to-point" part. This is just like any old leased circuit. No
DR/BDR is needed because there are only two nodes on either end of the
circuit.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=31
I'm starting the routing track for the CCNP and the cisco press book
confuses me on nbma. It says that the point to point multicast and point to
point unicast are both partial or star meshed and do not need a dr or bdr. I
was wondering how everyone stays current if it is not full meshed and has no
; On Wednesday, November 14, 2001, at 03:50 PM, Thomas Richardson wrote:
>
> > I have failed the CCNA test 6 times and am confused as to why. I feel I
> > have
> > passed but I keep getting scores in the 829 - 839 range. I have taken
> > a 5
> > week course in a priv
OTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 4:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Dazed and Confused [7:6705]
If you can memorize the stuff in the Cisco ICND book, you'll do fine.
On Wednesday, November 14, 2001, at 03:50 PM, Thomas Richardson wrote:
> I have failed the CCNA test
If you can memorize the stuff in the Cisco ICND book, you'll do fine.
On Wednesday, November 14, 2001, at 03:50 PM, Thomas Richardson wrote:
> I have failed the CCNA test 6 times and am confused as to why. I feel I
> have
> passed but I keep getting scores in the 829 - 839 range
. This is where the neighbor keyword "next-hop-self"
comes in handy. It forces the iBGP peer to set itself as the next hop when
sending to other iBGP peers.
HTH,
John
On Sun, 28 Oct 2001 02:20:39 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Hi,
|
| I'm a little confused about what cont
Hi,
I'm a little confused about what contains and do the NEXT_HOP attribut.
I thought it holds the address of the next border router. But I read in the
boson test the following:
The NEXT_HOP is set to the ip address of the _sending router_ ???
What happens ?? Any help
Thanks
Udo
, you could
always call your local Cisco office for some assistance.
-Brad Ellis
CCIE#5796
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
used cisco: www.optsys.net
""Kervin Pierre"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking into a T1 s
o,
> >
> > I'm looking into a T1 setup and I'm a bit confused with the cisco
> > options for equipment. I am looking for equipment for both ends of the
T1.
> >
> > What would be the cheapest setup? I'm looking at the 1600's right now.
>
> che
On Sat, 25 Aug 2001, Kervin Pierre wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm looking into a T1 setup and I'm a bit confused with the cisco
> options for equipment. I am looking for equipment for both ends of the T1.
>
> What would be the cheapest setup? I'm looking at the 1600&#
Hello,
I'm looking into a T1 setup and I'm a bit confused with the cisco
options for equipment. I am looking for equipment for both ends of the T1.
What would be the cheapest setup? I'm looking at the 1600's right now.
Are there major draw backs to using those? I'
s that it's the DR, and
that it has one OSPF neighbor - Router 2.
Now, the book tells me that even though it's not necessary, I should add
Router 3 as the OSPF neighbor on Router 2. I am a very nice guy, so I did
that right away.
However, this is where I am confused...
After I have ad
Hello, everybody
Now i am confusing about the burst in CAR and GTS.
In CAR, it say that
rate-limit output bps burst-normal burst-max ...
In GTS
traffic-shape group access-list bit-rate [burst-size [excess-burst-size]]
I think that bps in CAR is the same thing as the bit-rate in GTS, and
burs
n should be ashamed, and good for Cisco for
their attempts to limit ill-gotten gains.
Best, G.
-Original Message-
From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 10:37 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Confused about Cisco Agreement [7:8819]
At 0
1 - 100 of 153 matches
Mail list logo
