Re: [c-nsp] engineer opening

Hi, On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Manoj koshti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am looking for Network and Security Engineer with 3 year of networking > experience in cisco networking for graveyard shift Do you realise this is a mailing list with global membership? You haven't specified where

[c-nsp] engineer opening

Hi All,     I am looking for Network and Security Engineer with 3 year of networking experience in cisco networking for graveyard shift   Manoj Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo!

[c-nsp] AVPairs + Dynamic ACLs

Anyone know if it's possible to use AVpairs with Dynamic ACLs? Thanks -- James -- The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential and is intended for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) only. Any views expressed in this message are those of the

Re: [c-nsp] is RPF strict mode common?

On Thursday 08 May 2008, Adam Greene wrote: > Trying to control bandwidth between my (2) upstream > Internet providers, Global Crossing (20Mbps) and Savvis > (50Mbps). I currently receive full routes from both, and > the smaller Global Crossing link is maxed out, inbound. > > The obvious solution

[c-nsp] %CONTROLLER-2-FIRMWARE errors

Has anyone seen these errors before? May 8 14:31:27.827 PDT: %CONTROLLER-2-FIRMWARE: Controller E1 0/0, firmware is not running May 8 14:31:37.915 PDT: %CONTROLLER-2-FIRMWARE: Controller E1 0/0, firmware is not running I found a couple of posts, but didn't see much in the way of what fixed the

Re: [c-nsp] 3750 etherchannel only using 1 port

Well it seems all the hashing algos for cef and for etherchannel are exactly same. I tried cef universal with various hashes, I tried cef original, I tried etherchannel src ip, dst ip, and src-dst-ip :/ Everything has the same result.. Packets only output on one of the gig links on the port chan

Re: [c-nsp] Univercd

> Provide feedback on the website. I always do. I've gave up on that when someone replied that they fully agreed that the site was becoming less user-friendly, but they couldn't do anything about it because the marketing people ruled... Feedback about cisco.com makes absolutely no difference. It'

Re: [c-nsp] strange open sockets on a switch

On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 20:21 +0300, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote: > Any idea why the switch listens to all these ports? > > 3400#sh ip sockets > ProtoRemote Port Local Port In Out Stat TTY OutputIF > 17 0.0.0.0 0 x.x.x.x 1967 0 0 211 0 (sla > co

Re: [c-nsp] Univercd

Provide feedback on the website. I always do. On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 11:45 AM, Lamar Owen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thursday 08 May 2008, Kevin Graham wrote: > > As much as I'm disappointed to see /univercd become deprecated, the new > > documentation site at least looks OK once you can fin

Re: [c-nsp] 3550 Policing

Ah, if that's the case that makes sense... Thanks! Chris On 5/8/08, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I guess the "match any" under your class is like the class-default which > cannot be used for policing on the 3550. > > On the other hand, "dscp 0" refers to all traffic on

Re: [c-nsp] 3550 Policing

I guess the "match any" under your class is like the class-default which cannot be used for policing on the 3550. On the other hand, "dscp 0" refers to all traffic on untrusted ports, which might be ok for you. -- Tassos Chris Riling wrote on 8/5/2008 8:23 μμ: > I had heard of that before a

Re: [c-nsp] 3550 Policing

I had heard of that before as well, but now that I changed the class map to match-all on dscp 0 it *seems* to work. hmrph. I guess I'll just keep an eye on the MRTG graphs... : FastEthernet0/11 Ingress dscp: incoming no_change classified policeddropped (in bytes) Others: 3537826000 279186

[c-nsp] strange open sockets on a switch

Any idea why the switch listens to all these ports? 3400#sh ip sockets ProtoRemote Port Local Port In Out Stat TTY OutputIF 17 0.0.0.0 0 x.x.x.x 1967 0 0 211 0 (sla control) 17 y.y.y.y 162 x.x.x.x 61570 0 00 0 (send

Re: [c-nsp] 3550 Policing

I've come into issues before where the counters don't actually 'count' per say...It's working, but from looking at show commands...you wouldn't guess it. IOS bug. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Daniel Hooper Sent: Thu 5/8/2008 1:08 PM To: Chris Riling; cisco-ns

Re: [c-nsp] 3550 Policing

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:cisco-nsp- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Riling > Sent: Thursday, 8 May 2008 11:33 PM > To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net > Subject: [c-nsp] 3550 Policing > > Hi All, > > I'm having an issue with policing on the 3550; > >

Re: [c-nsp] Client/server bandwidth tester

On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 04:53:14PM -0700, Brandon Price wrote: > Hey guys, I'm looking for a good bandwidth tester. > > I would like to have something that has a server piece on one side and a > client on the other, > So for example I just setup a point to point wireless link for a > customer and

Re: [c-nsp] Ethernet Freezeup

Hi, just to give a status followup: On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 12:13:45PM +0200, Andre Beck wrote: > > nexus#sh track > Track 1 >Response Time Reporter 1 reachability >Reachability is Up > 1 change, last change 18:11:20 >Latest operation return code: OK >Latest RTT (millisec

Re: [c-nsp] is RPF strict mode common?

Thanks much for the replies on and off list. It does seem like strict RFP should *not* be an issue in the way I had been imagining. Thanks guys! - Original Message - From: "Justin M. Streiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Adam Greene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 9:

Re: [c-nsp] Univercd

On Thursday 08 May 2008, Kevin Graham wrote: > As much as I'm disappointed to see /univercd become deprecated, the new > documentation site at least looks OK once you can find the right navigation > links to it. The bigger problem is that, at least on the documentation DVD I have, that not everyt

Re: [c-nsp] 3750 etherchannel only using 1 port

Re Paul, On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 03:57:48PM -0400, Paul wrote: > I did the test etherchannel of course and it's working properly, but > since I am using the cef load balancing (two 0.0.0.0 routes with the > same cost) and it's going out two port channels the algorithm for that > must be exactl

[c-nsp] 3550 Policing

Hi All, I'm having an issue with policing on the 3550; mls qos class-map match-any Match-Any-Rate-Limit match any policy-map 10Mbps-Rate-Limit class Match-Any-Rate-Limit police 1000 200 exceed-action drop interface FastEthernet0/11 description switchport access vlan

Re: [c-nsp] Univercd

As much as I'm disappointed to see /univercd become deprecated, the new documentation site at least looks OK once you can find the right navigation links to it. What's far worse is what was just done to the old release navigator pages. Now, instead of searching by release, we get to search firs

Re: [c-nsp] is RPF strict mode common?

On Thu, 8 May 2008, Adam Greene wrote: > The obvious solution to me will be to prepend my route announcements to > Global Crossing. However, one question: there is a good chance that some > of my traffic will flow out through Savvis and in through Global > Crossing (in fact, that's almost certa

[c-nsp] is RPF strict mode common?

Hi, Trying to control bandwidth between my (2) upstream Internet providers, Global Crossing (20Mbps) and Savvis (50Mbps). I currently receive full routes from both, and the smaller Global Crossing link is maxed out, inbound. The obvious solution to me will be to prepend my route announcements t