Hello Eric:
You can issue the following command in the 3550 series that takes care
of that issue. However, your mileage may vary. :-)
No errdisable detect cause gbic-invalid
Mike
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
> Eric Kuhnke
> Sen
Eric Brunner-Williams is slightly incorrect in his description
of the blog-spammer's attack, because he's misinterpreting whois.
He states that based on the spammer's entry in the whois entry,
the spammer "claims domicile" in whatever location.
Whois records don't make any claims about domicile,
>>So what's the cable HFC Achilles heel?
As an observer, only, here ;)
... for one thing, investment is one of HFC's weaknesses as it relates to
alternative transmission techniques in the broadband space, as witnessed by
Rainmaker Technologies' early out. And while Narad's team may tell
E-crime = E-crap another media driven dribbled label.
There are many students, even housewives who in their
spare time write botnets and other software mechanisms
simply for the purpose of learning how to program, in
C and C++ or even learn how to script in Perl, Python
and tcl. To make a blanket
All of these are great observations. So what's the cable HFC Achilles heel?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 12:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ''Christopher J. Wolff''; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [url correction] Cable net
On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 17:06:20 EDT, "Jamie C.Pole" said:
> Because academics know EVERYTHING.
What's that got to do with anything? (or are you making the rather rash and
all-too-common generalization that everybody who posts from a .edu is an
academic? Surprise - at least some sites are clued enou
With the rise of extortion incidents online, there's no doubt in my
mind that we've got lots of things that relate here. You rarely ever
find one crime being done independantly of another. I mean how do you
suppose that the terrorists get their funding? Large sums of money
pass to them every year
On Jun 1, 2004, at 4:53 PM, Bora Akyol wrote:
On 6/1/04 7:24 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
To be brutal - do we really need to declare a "War on E-Crime" when
we're
still
fighting a War on Terrorism and a War on Drugs?
How do you know they are not related.
Bora
Because acade
Be warned that you can't use non-Cisco CWDM SFPs or GBICs in a cisco
switch or router... There is a PROM code in the cisco-sold units that
is identified by IOS. Plug in a non-cisco SFP/GBIC and it will shut
down the port. (This was discussed about 9 months ago on nanog-l, it
should be in the
On 6/1/04 7:24 AM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> To be brutal - do we really need to declare a "War on E-Crime" when we're
> still
> fighting a War on Terrorism and a War on Drugs?
How do you know they are not related.
Bora
You need to check the switches to make sure they support the xWDM GBICs
though. The older Cisco switches don't support them. Last time I
checked, 3500XLs didn't support them, but 3550s did...
Chuck Church
Lead Design Engineer
CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE
Wam!Net Government Services - Design & Imple
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, Peter Lothberg wrote:
>
> > > 2.5/40Gb.. only 6.25% usage.. you sure you needed to spend the money upgrading
> > > from your OC192? :)
> > did peter really spend anything for his oc-192? :) If it's a free upgrade
> > why pass it up?
>
> This is not to the house, it's inside Sp
> If you only need two GigE circuits, the least expensive
> solution is probably standard LX/LH GBICs and passive
> splitter/combiners. Available from several vendors, for instance
>
http://www.mrv.com/product/MRV-FD-SPLTCMB/
> Disclaimer: I have no practical experience with this produ
Finisar also has CWDM optics in both the SFP and GBIC form factor and they
are quite a bit less expensive than the Cisco solution and they do have a
16 lambda passive OADM as well as the 4 and 8 lambda models.
Scott C. McGrath
On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, Erik Haagsman wrote:
> I'm wondering if anyone has seen a good and cheap(er) solution for
> providing multiple Gigabit Ethernet circuits over single pair of
> fiber. I'm looking for a way to do CWDM or DWDM that's cheaper than
> putting in a Cisco 15454 or 15327. I'm only going to be doing 2 GigE
> circuits between
What you could try is use the Cisco CWDM-MUX-4 and it's pluggable optics
that can be fit into any GBIC 802.3z compliant slot. It's just an OADM
with 4 or 8 wavelengths that delivers GigE to any box with pluggable
GBICs provided you use the right optics and it's quite a bit cheaper
than using ONS s
> > 2.5/40Gb.. only 6.25% usage.. you sure you needed to spend the money upgrading
> > from your OC192? :)
> did peter really spend anything for his oc-192? :) If it's a free upgrade
> why pass it up?
This is not to the house, it's inside Sprintlink shipping real live traffic.
-P
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello All:
I'm wondering if anyone has seen a good and cheap(er) solution for
providing multiple Gigabit Ethernet circuits over single pair of
fiber. I'm looking for a way to do CWDM or DWDM that's cheaper than
putting in a Cisco 15454 or 15327.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
All,
Please could any DC service providers with a POP physically close to
Connecticut and Florida NW contact me off-list if they are able to
offer temoprary (i.e. 1 month) public internet connectivity at DS-3
or 100Mbps.
Thanks,
Ben.
-BEGIN PGP
On Tue, 01 Jun 2004 00:01:48 PDT, John Obi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
(Insert standard "Death of Internet predicted, film at 11" sound bite here)
> I found this important article, maybe it's the time to
> have the FBI to work in the e-crime more and more.
Then again, maybe it's not.
Where will
Hello,
I found this important article, maybe it's the time to
have the FBI to work in the e-crime more and more.
http://www.starbanner.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040506/ZNYT05/405060313/1009/BUSINESS
Thanks,
-J
__
Do you Yahoo!?
21 matches
Mail list logo