Hi all,
I would like to deploy a VoIP PBX here with also SIP trunk options to
multiple VoIP Providers.
As far as I know Cisco Cube just support 1 SIP Trunk -I thought to
remember that in one version out there it supported more but I didn't
find that information again so maybe I am wrong about
Do you really need permit tcp any any established or can you be more
specific? I'd bet that is causing what you are seeing.
Adam.
- Original Message -
From: abs abhishak...@yahoo.com
To: Steve Bertrand st...@ibctech.ca; Jared Mauch
ja...@puck.nether.net
Cc:
Hi all,
we've got a little problem with our vpdn where we're stuck. Could anyone
explain the following debugging messages from our 7206 to me:
VPDN Vi12 disconnect (AAA) IETF: 8/port-error Ascend: 41/TCP Foreign Host Close
VPDN Vi12 vpdn shutdown session, result=2, error=6, vendor_err=0,
We currently have 8 racks of servers with about 21 servers per rack +2 IP-PDUs
and are pretty much using an entire 24-port switch (C2960G right now) in each
rack. Some racks have a 48-port C2960G due to some boxes having redundant
nics, but our main 48 port switch is maxxed out due to some
Sebastian,
You can try looking at the output of show vpdn history.
I think the error you get means that the remote side requested a
disconnect, but I also see some cases this appears by mistake...
Arie
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
On 23/12/2009 15:13, Doug Warner wrote:
What's a good method for growing here? Do people like top-of-rack for
situations where we have a cage (all the racks are side-by-side), or do you
prefer end-of-row?
There was an interesting presentation at NANOG last June about the various
top-of-rack
you have mpls in ISP network?
2009/12/23 Asad asad...@cyber.net.pk
Dear Friends!
I have the following scenario.
(Customer Cisco Router)--Ethernet-[Routed CPE]---RF
Media-(ISP Cisco Router)--Ethernet---(ISP Cisco BRAS)
My Requirement is to Dial PPPoE
Asad,
Yes, client initiated L2TP on the CPE router could do it if you want to
have a PPP session and do normal PPP authentication on the BRAS.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_3t/12_3t2/feature/guide/gtvoltun.
html
Another option could be to just run a static GRE tunnel from the CPE to
the
What's a good method for growing here? Do people like top-of-rack for
situations where we have a cage (all the racks are side-by-side), or do you
prefer end-of-row?
Top-of-rack vs. end-of-row approaches a religious debate. There
are arguments on both sides, and the believers will attempt
that is what i was thinking as well so i removed that line but that caused all
responses to internal traffic to be blocked. What do you exactly mean by
specific? Wouldn't I have to put a rule for each type of traffic?
--- On Wed, 12/23/09, Adam Strawson a...@thepub.cx wrote:
From: Adam
I have included the command, it's output, the ACL and the config for the
interface getting the ACL below, but was still wondering why the explicit deny
is required if i have a deny all (default deny policy) at the end of the ACL?
command:
nmap -P0 -A -O ip address
PORT STATE SERVICE
abs wrote:
that is what i was thinking as well so i removed that line but that caused
all responses to internal traffic to be blocked. What do you exactly mean by
specific? Wouldn't I have to put a rule for each type of traffic?
On an inbound ACL, allowing established TCP sessions means
that makes a lot more sense now..
the box i'm running nmap from is from a remote location. i am able to telnet
into port 1720 and the connection is established (as per netstat -na)
i also added deny tcp any any eq 1720 at the top of the acl but that still
didn't help. i'm still able to
Have you done a tcptraceroute to see if someone is intercepting your tcp/1720?
- Jared
On Dec 23, 2009, at 2:34 PM, abs wrote:
that makes a lot more sense now..
the box i'm running nmap from is from a remote location. i am able to telnet
into port 1720 and the connection is established
doesn't look like it's being intercepted... the traffic goes from my host to
the router to my ip address...
--- On Wed, 12/23/09, Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net wrote:
From: Jared Mauch ja...@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Port 1720 1863
To: abs abhishak...@yahoo.com
Cc: Steve
We are a pretty small enterprise(100 racks, ~300servers and lots of
Cisco gear) and we are consolidated end of row. That means we have
aggregated our switches in a few central racks and haul all of the
copper to each rack.
Our datacenter is extremely nice and we pride ourselves on how the place
thank you all for your help. for the folks interested the issue was that the
two ports are being intercepted by my ISP. once again thank you all for you
help
cheers,
abs
--- On Wed, 12/23/09, Steve Bertrand st...@ibctech.ca wrote:
From: Steve Bertrand st...@ibctech.ca
Subject: Re: [c-nsp]
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, abs wrote:
doesn't look like it's being intercepted... the traffic goes from my host to
the router to my ip address...
I'm with Jared on the theory that there is a middlebox somewhere on
the way being transparently helpful - though probably worth clarifying
that you
Good Evening Everyone
can this policy support a esp-3des setup? or only a esp-des? usually i do a
put in a encryption des or encryption 3des, but not sure if not putting
in one could default to a des? inf theres an existing policy like the one
below, should i create a new policy or just include
The transport product was supposed to be able to re-tag, but we learned
during the turn-up that that's coming in future version. As you can
imagine, we will be having further discussions on this issue.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Thomas Habets [mailto:tho...@habets.pp.se]
Sent:
On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:11 AM, Michael Balasko wrote:
There are dozens of technical arguments either way, but our issue is
primarily cable density
Which also plays into cooling/HVAC.
---
Roland Dobbins rdobb...@arbor.net
On Dec 24, 2009, at 12:48 AM, Buhrmaster, Gary wrote:
Cabling costs (tends to favor tor)
Concur.
Virtualization (layer-2 requirements, tends to favor eor)
Disagree - how do you think EoR is better in this regard?
bisection bandwidth (tends to favor eor)
Disagree again.
Racks
ios default to DES..
you can always use sh crypto isakmp policy to verify.
On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 7:44 AM, O n i xerus...@gmail.com wrote:
Good Evening Everyone
can this policy support a esp-3des setup? or only a esp-des? usually i do a
put in a encryption des or encryption 3des, but not
23 matches
Mail list logo
