[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 25 February 2003 17:52
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Strange problem with a 2924XL. [7:63680]
Here's more information I should have included in the first message:
#sh int f0/13
FastEthernet0/13 is up, line protocol is up
Hardware is Fast Ethernet, addre
-Original Message-
From: Ken Diliberto [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 25 February 2003 15:52
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Strange problem with a 2924XL. [7:63680]
Here's more information I should have included in the first message:
#sh int f0/13
FastEthernet0/13 is up, line protocol
8:35:33.480: %LINK-4-ERROR: FastEthernet0/13 is
> experiencing
> errors
> Feb 24 18:37:06.128: %LINK-4-ERROR: FastEthernet0/13 is
> experiencing
> errors
> Feb 24 18:38:06.935: %LINK-4-ERROR: FastEthernet0/13 is
> experiencing
> errors
>
>
> >>> "The L
: %LINK-4-ERROR: FastEthernet0/13 is experiencing
errors
>>> "The Long and Winding Road"
02/24/03 11:20PM >>>
""Ken Diliberto"" wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I had a strange problem this evening with a 2924XL. The server
attached
> to
Steiven Poh-(Jaring MailBox) wrote:
> Can the "set spantree port-fast" solve this issue?
No. But like the previous poster implied, is storm control enabled on
that port? That would explain it. If it's not, I can't really explain it.
Regards,
Marco.
M
Hi All,
Can the "set spantree port-fast" solve this issue?
Steiven
- Original Message -
From: "The Long and Winding Road"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 3:20 PM
Subject: Re: Strange problem with a 2924XL. [7:63680]
> ""Ken Diliberto""
""Ken Diliberto"" wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I had a strange problem this evening with a 2924XL. The server attached
> to port f0/13 had been generating errors and finally the switch stopped
> talking to it. A shut/no shut combination started everyt
7;; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Strange problem with new flash memory and old Cisco 3640
rout er [7:63341]
Have you compared the Bootstrap versions between the box in question vs
those that successfully use the new flash?
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Larkins [mailto:[EMAIL P
I had a strange problem this evening with a 2924XL. The server attached
to port f0/13 had been generating errors and finally the switch stopped
talking to it. A shut/no shut combination started everything back up
again.
The configuration only says to send a trap when a broadcast storm
happens
Have you compared the Bootstrap versions between the box in question vs
those that successfully use the new flash?
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Larkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 6:15 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Stran
Hi all,
I have a strange one for you guys and would appreciate any ideas you may
have.
I have a Cisco 3640 router that is operating normally. It is however using
IOS 11.1 and we have bought memory to upgrade this (sho ver below) . We
install the DRAM and all is great. Install the flash and the r
les
> > >
> > > ""Sam Sneed"" wrote in message
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > load a packet sniffer on the laptop and see what really
> > > happens. If you
> > > > don't have one I kn
.polito.it/install/default.htm
> > > http://analyzer.polito.it/install/default.htm
> > >
> > > Then you can see if the packets are coming back to you and if
> > windows is
> > > dropping them for some reason.
> > >
> > > ""Charles R
essage-
> From: Sam Sneed [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 5:50 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: what the h... - strange problem - Cisco doesn't like
> [7:62149]
>
>
> That HUB doesn't know the difference between the various
quot; wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I ran across a strange problem with one of our POPs the other day, and am
in
> the process of researching/troubleshooting it. We have a configuration
> something like this:
>
>
>"Interne
.it/install/default.htm
> > http://analyzer.polito.it/install/default.htm
> >
> > Then you can see if the packets are coming back to you and if windows is
> > dropping them for some reason.
> >
> > ""Charles Riley"" wrote in messa
t.htm
> > http://analyzer.polito.it/install/default.htm
> >
> > Then you can see if the packets are coming back to you and if
> windows is
> > dropping them for some reason.
> >
> > ""Charles Riley"" wrote in message
> > [EMAIL PROTE
rs at the POP location.
Any strange MTU configured anywhere?
> -Original Message-
> From: Charles Riley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 4:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: what the h... - strange problem - Cisco doesn't like Windows?
it/install/default.htm
> >
> > Then you can see if the packets are coming back to you and if windows is
> > dropping them for some reason.
> >
> > ""Charles Riley"" wrote in message
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
&g
iley"" wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I ran across a strange problem with one of our POPs the other day, and
am
> in
> > the process of researching/troubleshooting it. We have a configuration
> > something like this:
>
f the packets are coming back to you and if windows is
dropping them for some reason.
""Charles Riley"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I ran across a strange problem with one of our POPs the other day, and am
in
> the process of res
I ran across a strange problem with one of our POPs the other day, and am in
the process of researching/troubleshooting it. We have a configuration
something like this:
"Internet"---2500---AS5300---D/U Users
Not shown is a LAN connected to the 2nd Ethernet on the
Can u establish any pattern of dropped packets
Most likely ur modem setting needs to be checked up for frame as well as
unframe setting.
Regds,
Kiran
>From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>Reply-To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Strange Prob
wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Dear Friends,
>
>
> I have strange problem at hands. I have 2 Serial Sync 64kbps links
> connecting to 2 different places. The problem is one of the link start
> dropping packets (after 3 hrs) moment both the
Dear Friends,
I have strange problem at hands. I have 2 Serial Sync 64kbps links
connecting to 2 different places. The problem is one of the link start
dropping packets (after 3 hrs) moment both the links are put one ANY ONE
router. I used 1751,2511,2610. I also put a different WIC & diffe
ot;>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I worked on a network move for a brokerage company last week and
> encountered a VERY strange problem.
>
> We moved a bunch of equipment to a new office building. During the
> process, we changed the internal network from 192.168.100.0/24 to
> 172.31
ssing that should, of course, work.
Priscilla
Craig Columbus wrote:
>
> I worked on a network move for a brokerage company last week
> and
> encountered a VERY strange problem.
>
> We moved a bunch of equipment to a new office building. During
> the
> process, we
gt;redistribution or some static route from 3rd party equipment might creep
>into the mix.
>
>Let us all know. Especially me. I still have a soft spot in my heart for
>brokerage.
>
>Chuck
>
>--
>TANSTAAFL
>"there ain't no such thing as a free lunch"
&
mbus"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I worked on a network move for a brokerage company last week and
> encountered a VERY strange problem.
>
> We moved a bunch of equipment to a new office building. During the
> process, we changed
the problem reoccurs.
At 07:09 PM 12/21/2002 -0600, you wrote:
>On Sat, 2002-12-21 at 13:10, Craig Columbus wrote:
> > I worked on a network move for a brokerage company last week and
> > encountered a VERY strange problem.
>
>sounds like a broadcast problem to me... did you ha
If I understand you correctly, I don't think we were seeing what you're
describing.
We had the problem I described even when all devices were attached to a
single 3548.
Also, someone else asked about the MAC addressesthey were all
correct. Clearing MACs on the switch didn't help the issue
I worked on a network move for a brokerage company last week and
encountered a VERY strange problem.
We moved a bunch of equipment to a new office building. During the
process, we changed the internal network from 192.168.100.0/24 to
172.31.4.0/22.
There company has 4 Cisco 3500XL 48 port
ers are running.
> I'd appreciate comments for those who have more specific info. I'll see if
I
> can find time to experiment.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Munit Singla [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 4:57 PM
> &
; To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
>
>
> Hi Godswill,
> Thanx for reply.I agree with u,but Still the doubt persists
> if both the
> commands
> are used then both entries come to the route table.As per
> your and mine
> theo
l help you.
Regards.
Godswill
- Original Message -
From: Munit Singla
To: Godswill Oletu
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 5:56 PM
Subject: Re: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
Hi Godswill,
Thanx for reply.I agree with u,but Still the doubt persists if b
Hi Chris,
Hi the why its showing in the rout table.I have already given my route
table.Please
refer it and do clear my confusion.
Regards,
Munit
chris kane wrote:
> > all static routes have an AD of 1...whether it is using ur interface or
> not.
> > all directly connected interface have an AD of
o depends whether you
> want to do load balancing, floating static route, etc...
>
> Regards.
> Godswill Oletu
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Munit Singla
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 11:44 AM
> Subject: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
>
&g
etc...
Regards.
Godswill Oletu
- Original Message -
From: Munit Singla
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 11:44 AM
Subject: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
> Hi all,
> Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it shows
> with Administrative
> all static routes have an AD of 1...whether it is using ur interface or
not.
> all directly connected interface have an AD of 0
> > Hi all,
> > Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it
shows
> > with Administrative distance of 1,whereas we know that static routes to
>
all static routes have an AD of 1...whether it is using ur interface or
not.
> all directly connected interface have an AD of 0
> - Original Message -
> From: "Munit Singla"
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 4:44 PM
> Subject: Strange problem of route table
all static routes have an AD of 1...whether it is using ur interface or not.
all directly connected interface have an AD of 0
- Original Message -
From: "Munit Singla"
To:
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 4:44 PM
Subject: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
>
Hi all,
Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it shows
with Administrative distance of 1,whereas we know that static routes to our
own interface have AD. of zero.
Example
C 10.77.152.128/25 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0
S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.77.152.129
i
Hi group ,
I have a vsat link from my service provider and i have two network
which is 64.110.93.192/28 and 216.252.243.0.I have a strange problem if
i use ip from 64 network on downloading any file from net i am geting
very good speed but if use ip from 216 network i am downloading same
: strange problem
[7:37359]
nobody@groups
tudy.com
did you try doing an nslookup?
-Original Message-
From: Anthony Ramsey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 10:59 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fwd: Re: strange problem [7:37359]
if you have layer 3 connectivity, as you mentioned,
you can ping ip addresses on
ical
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: strange problem [7:37359]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: "Chuck"
Precedence: bulk
Content-Length: 909
David Letterman's top 10 reasons this customer can't browse the internet:
10) aliens are abducting the packets
9) someone experime
ernal..
next check ie settings.. make sure they dont have a proxy set or something.
Post config here.
""kaushalender"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi group
>
> I am facing strange problem one of customer whom we h
in comedy
1) there is an access list on the edge router that is wreaking havoc
my best guess, never having seen configs or traceroutes, etc
Chuck
""kaushalender"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi group
>
> I am
3) The Telco disconnected themselves because they forgot to pay their own
bill.
- Original Message -
From: "Joe Morabito"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 11:59 PM
Subject: Re: strange problem [7:37359]
> 6) the crossing guard got a virus and is out sick today, no
Chuck"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 11:03 PM
Subject: Re: strange problem [7:37359]
> David Letterman's top 10 reasons this customer can't browse the internet:
>
> 10) aliens are abducting the packets
>
> 9) someone experimenting in Tessla physics has created a ti
will never have a successful career in comedy
1) there is an access list on the edge router that is wreaking havoc
my best guess, never having seen configs or traceroutes, etc
Chuck
""kaushalender"" wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED].;
> Hi group
>
> I am
Hi group
I am facing strange problem one of customer whom we have given 128Kbps
linkand connected on ppp ecapsulation. They r not able to browse the
website.When i did traceroute and ping it was working fine and customer
is able to reach the internet .But when i typed www.yahoo.com in the
CTED])
wrote:
> Dear All
> I am facing a strange problem in 1751 routers.
> In a simple scenario in which two 1751 are connected with
over a channel
> with
> serial port and eigrp is used for routing.
>
> Router 1
> s 0/0 ip addr 192.168.10.1
> fe 0/0 ip addr 192.168.1
Dear All
I am facing a strange problem in 1751 routers.
In a simple scenario in which two 1751 are connected with over a channel with
serial port and eigrp is used for routing.
Router 1
s 0/0 ip addr 192.168.10.1
fe 0/0 ip addr 192.168.1.1
Router 2
s 0/0 ip addr 192.168.10.2
fe 0/0 ip addr
Have you made sure the HPUX machine's IP isn't duplicated on another machine
?
""Amit Gupta"" wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED].;
> hello All,
>
> I am facing a strange problem with one of our UNIX
> Servers.
> I am able to ping and telnet
hello All,
I am facing a strange problem with one of our UNIX
Servers.
I am able to ping and telnet from this UNIX machine to
any other server/machine but it pings occasionally the
other way round.
I have checked the speed and duplex settings on the
Cisco Catalyst switch and matched it with
Or if you have an incorrect number of default routes..
Bri
On Fri, 15 Feb 2002, PING wrote:
> This also happens if you have duplicate IP address
>
> Nadeem
> ==
>
> Hamid Ali Asgari wrote:
>
> > Hi group,
> >
> > I have a router which is the main gateway of my network. All the
> > h
Do you have diagram of your network. If you do send it to me
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=35594&t=35589
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct a
This also happens if you have duplicate IP address
Nadeem
==
Hamid Ali Asgari wrote:
> Hi group,
>
> I have a router which is the main gateway of my network. All the
> hosts on my network can successfully ping everywhere on the internet,
> but the ROUTER itself has always a success rate at
use the "show IP route " and there will more than likely be 2
routes out
-Original Message-
From: Brian [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 02 February 2002 07:21 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Strange Problem: Everything works fine but the Router can
[7:34171]
The e
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Erick B. wrote:
> try pinging with extended commands
> using your LAN IP as a source and see if that is
> error-free. If it is, then the destination router has
> a route back to that IP subnet fine.
Yep, I'd suggest attempting to ping something from the LAN interface.
Sounds
Have you tried disabling ip route-cache?? In the past couple weeks I have
run into
two route-cache bugs.
Dave
Brian wrote:
> so what does sh ip ro 193.0.0.193 give? If only the one static, then try
> debugging icmp on a ping test..
>
> Bri
>
> On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Hamid wrote:
>
> >
so what does sh ip ro 193.0.0.193 give? If only the one static, then try
debugging icmp on a ping test..
Bri
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Hamid wrote:
> As I mentioned before, there is no load balancing. Here are my route
> statements. (my CLASS C IPs have been replaced by 172.16.1.0, but actua
As I mentioned before, there is no load balancing. Here are my route
statements. (my CLASS C IPs have been replaced by 172.16.1.0, but actually
there is no 172.16.1.0 network)
Router#sh run | include ip route
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Serial4/0
ip route 193.0.0.193 255.255.255.255 Serial4/0
ip rou
All you should need for a default is
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 netconnectedinterface
That plus igp or connected routes for your lan is all thats needed in a
simplistic setup.
Brian
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Hamid wrote:
> I tried adding a static route with 193.0.0.193 255.255.255.255 to the
ro
Lets see all your ip route route statements, and are you running routing
protocols?
Brian
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Hamid wrote:
> I tried adding a static route with 193.0.0.193 255.255.255.255 to the
router
> but still the problem is not resolved.
>
> The problem is that every host in the in
Hi,
This usually happens when a router has 2 routes to the
same destination net but one of the next-hops doesn't
have a route back to the source.
Whats your routing table look like, how about the
destination routers routing table?
Is the IP address space on your LAN side public space
your ISP
I tried adding a static route with 193.0.0.193 255.255.255.255 to the router
but still the problem is not resolved.
The problem is that every host in the internet is pinged with exactly 50%
seccess rate. I have only one default route so I don't think there is any
load balancing.
Any commnets???
The every other packet behavior sometimes indicates multiple static
routes, do a sh ip ro for the dest and see whats there..
On Sat, 2 Feb 2002, Hamid Ali Asgari wrote:
> Hi group,
>
> I have a router which is the main gateway of my network. All the
> hosts on my network can successfully ping ev
Hi group,
I have a router which is the main gateway of my network. All the
hosts on my network can successfully ping everywhere on the internet,
but the ROUTER itself has always a success rate at 50%. Bellow is the
ping result:
Router#ping
Protocol [ip]:
Target IP address: 193.0.0.193
Re
gineer
> > Planetary Networks
> > 535 West 34th Street
> > New York, NY
> > 10001
> > Cell:(516) 782.1535
> > Desk: (646) 792.2395
> > Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Fax:(646) 792.2396
> > - Original Message -----
> > From: "Kira
: "Dar"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 1:30 PM
Subject: strange problem in voice [7:9093]
> Hi,
> i configured voice on two routers, on one router i hav a phone set
attached
> with Fxs and on the other router Pbx is connected with fxo. I can recieve
> and make calls from bot
Hi,
i configured voice on two routers, on one router i hav a phone set attached
with Fxs and on the other router Pbx is connected with fxo. I can recieve
and make calls from both ends, but i m having this problem that the phone
keeps on ringing even when i onhook the phone.
Regards,
Dar
Messa
What IOS version fixed your problem?
Aurelian Georgescu
-Original Message-
From: John Hardman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 9:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Strange Problem with router... [7:6293]
Hi
Have you changed anything in the network of late
> Planetary Networks
> > 535 West 34th Street
> > New York, NY
> > 10001
> > Cell:(516) 782.1535
> > Desk: (646) 792.2395
> > Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Fax:(646) 792.2396
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Kiran Kumar M&
-- Original Message -
> From: "Kiran Kumar M"
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 4:19 PM
> Subject: Strange Problem with router... [7:6293]
>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am facing a strange problem from last two days. One of my 3640 router
> >
k Engineer
Planetary Networks
535 West 34th Street
New York, NY
10001
Cell:(516) 782.1535
Desk: (646) 792.2395
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fax:(646) 792.2396
- Original Message -
From: "Kiran Kumar M"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 4:19 PM
Subject: Strange Problem with route
PM
Subject: Strange Problem with router... [7:6293]
> Hi,
>
> I am facing a strange problem from last two days. One of my 3640 router
> is behaving in a strange manner.
>
> Sudenly it is becoming 60 - 99 % CPU utilization.(Usally 20 - 30 %) at the
> same time It is droping th
problem arised only for last two days..
Any ideas to overcome this problem..
thanks,
Kiran
On Wed, 30 May 2001, Kiran Kumar M wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am facing a strange problem from last two days. One of my 3640 router
> is behaving in a strange manner.
>
> Sudenly it is b
Hi,
I am facing a strange problem from last two days. One of my 3640 router
is behaving in a strange manner.
Sudenly it is becoming 60 - 99 % CPU utilization.(Usally 20 - 30 %) at the
same time It is droping the output packets on Main Serial link (which is
using for uplink/downlink) and input
Regarding your problem, Gary, just get on the phone with that ISPs tech
support and don't let the engineer off the line until they've removed the
filter. I had to battle an engineer at UUNET to get him to double-check
their filters as my Sprint blocks weren't getting seen through their AS.
When h
I have the same problem at my site we are using BGP routing and when the link
to our ISP thats provides us with the IP blocks goes down traffic goes out the
other ling but tries to return on the down link because our bgp routes are be
filter by the other provider that has agried to advertise them
CTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 02, 2001 1:49 AM
Subject: Strange problem, Pls help
> Hi,
> I hve 2621 router and tow WAN links are terminating on
> that, my proble is this is one of my wan link goes
> down then second link drop the packets.
> What
Hi,
I hve 2621 router and tow WAN links are terminating on
that, my proble is this is one of my wan link goes
down then second link drop the packets.
What colud be the reason of that.
ravi
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo!
>Hi,there:
>
>I'm studying the section of in Halabi's book,
>But unfortunately, I never get pass.
>
>Please watch the topology attached in this mail, The 3640-1,2610,
>2501-2 router run bgp protocol,but ospf run between 3640-1 and
>3640-2.
>
>
>The question is if I use clear ip bgp * command, the
>Hi,there:
>
>I'm studying the section of in Halabi's book,
>But unfortunately, I never get pass.
>
>Please watch the topology attached in this mail, The 3640-1,2610,
>2501-2 router run bgp protocol,but ospf run between 3640-1 and
>3640-2.
>
>
>The question is if I use clear ip bgp * command, the
Hi,there:
I'm studying the section of in Halabi's book,
But unfortunately, I never get pass.
Please watch the topology attached in this mail, The 3640-1,2610,
2501-2 router run bgp protocol,but ospf run between 3640-1 and
3640-2.
The question is if I use clear ip bgp * command, the ospf rout
Cisco Engineer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject: Strange problem with Cisco 2501 routers
Hi Folks,
I have a few Cisco 2501 routers all eith the same
startup problem. On startup, the routers behave
normal, but after the "Pr
The ROM version of 3.3 catches my eye. Might be good to update those. Call
the TAC. They will provide them for shipping cost.
> -Original Message-
> From: Cisco Engineer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 8:28 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> S
, February 07, 2001 7:31 AM
To: 'John Neiberger'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Strange problem with Cisco 2501 routers
You're right, but I think he is talking about the UPDOWN messages.
This could be due to a "shutdown" line in each interface, but
7 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Strange problem with Cisco 2501 routers
The only startup errors evident in this output is this:
> Unknown or ambiguous service arg - udp-small-servers
> Unknown or ambiguous service arg - tcp-small-servers
> Illegal IP key
The only startup errors evident in this output is this:
> Unknown or ambiguous service arg - udp-small-servers
> Unknown or ambiguous service arg - tcp-small-servers
> Illegal IP keyword - classless
You're probably seeing this because you are running IOS 11.1(7), but your config is
pasted in fr
???
http://www.oledrews.com/job
-Original Message-
From: Cisco Engineer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2001 8:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Strange problem with Cisco 2501 routers
Hi Folks,
I have a few Cisco 2501 r
Hi Folks,
I have a few Cisco 2501 routers all eith the same
startup problem. On startup, the routers behave
normal, but after the "Press RETURN to get started"
message, the routers come up with errors about the
ethernet and serial interfaces, restarts and then hang
up completely.
Thinking that
anuary 29, 2001 11:40 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: strange problem
hi I got a customer who intially has a defautl route
that does not work . Interesting is that when I take
out the statement and put in again it works perfect.
I am puzzled about such problem
ip classless is all the while in
cust
hi I got a customer who intially has a defautl route
that does not work . Interesting is that when I take
out the statement and put in again it works perfect.
I am puzzled about such problem
ip classless is all the while in
customer is running 25xx series routers
any form of input will be gre
hi I got a customer who intially has a defautl route
that does not work . Interesting is that when I take
out the statement and put in again it works perfect.
I am puzzled about such problem
ip classless is all the while in
customer is running 25xx series routers
any form of input will be gre
Hi,
Today I got my second leased line and after that I
find very strange thing in traceroute command.
My IP rages are
45.x.x.x from one ISP
162.x.x.x from second ISP
My gateway which is doing NATting in ip range of
45.x.x.x
both of my lines are using Static routes.
Protocols are PPP
the cfgmaker should automatically make a mrtg.cfg file of all the active
interfaces on a switch. Otherwise, it will REM them out as
inactive. Uncomment the lines in your mrtg.cfg file to monitor all the ports.
My only explanation why it won't pull info from the fourth switch is maybe
a misco
Why would MRTG not pull stats from a switch if all the switches are configured
the same? I have 4 switches located in the same location. I can pull
data off three of them but not the fourth? any suggestions?
Also, can anyone tell me how to configure MRTG to pull data for each
individual switch
1 - 100 of 115 matches
Mail list logo
