Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
fred, seeing as there is not now, and likely never will be fixed
versions for many of our routers (25xx, 17xx, ..., and i can't
No?
Logged in to ftp.cisco.com.
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, [iso-8859-1] Bjørn Mork wrote:
Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
fred, seeing as there is not now, and likely never will be fixed
versions for many of our routers (25xx, 17xx, ..., and i can't
No?
Logged in to ftp.cisco.com.
Current remote directory is /cisco.
note image size of 11/12/16 mb... note that many (most?)
2500's don't have 16M flash :( many, many referenced before
(term servers for instance) are 2mb flash boxes. It's
possible that Randy's referring to this sort of 2500. Kindly
using himself for a whipping boy instead of the rest of
Christopher L. Morrow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, [iso-8859-1] Bjørn Mork wrote:
Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
fred, seeing as there is not now, and likely never will be fixed
versions for many of our routers (25xx, 17xx, ..., and i can't
No?
Logged in to
Dear Colleagues,
This announcement is being sent to multiple lists. I apologise for
duplicates.
The RIPE NCC received the IPv4 address range 89.0.0.0 -
91.255.255.255 (89.0.0.0/8 and 90.0.0.0/7) from the IANA in June
2005. We expect to start making allocations from this range in the
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Neil J. McRae wrote:
note image size of 11/12/16 mb... note that many (most?)
2500's don't have 16M flash :( many, many referenced before
(term servers for instance) are 2mb flash boxes. It's
possible that Randy's referring to this sort of 2500. Kindly
using
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, [iso-8859-1] Bjørn Mork wrote:
Christopher L. Morrow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, [iso-8859-1] Bjørn Mork wrote:
Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
fred, seeing as there is not now, and likely never will be fixed
versions for many of our
cons uptime is 1 week, 10 hours, 42 minutes System restarted
by power-on System image file is flash:igs-i-l.111-9,
booted via flash
cisco 2511 (68030) processor (revision D) with 2048K/2048K
bytes of memory.
lather/rinse/repeat... where are the images that fit in my
2501's
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:
On Mon, 1 Aug 2005, Bjørn Mork wrote:
The poor guy/gal at the other end of the line will need a really good
answer. Does anyone here have one?
to avoid being technical i guess the only answer would be to say this is a
private service
Not really an operational question, but an engineering question non-the-less.
This may also not be the most suitable
forum, but there is a large brain trust here that can probably answer my
questions.
We are looking at a business plan to launch a large VOIP carrier globally. My
questions
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Neil J. McRae wrote:
cons uptime is 1 week, 10 hours, 42 minutes System restarted
by power-on System image file is flash:igs-i-l.111-9,
booted via flash
cisco 2511 (68030) processor (revision D) with 2048K/2048K
bytes of memory.
lather/rinse/repeat...
no, but I'd like to... since I'm upgrading and all (for
security reasons and ipv6 is so much better for security, right? :) )
ok so your issue is totally irrelvant to the recent ciscogate
paranoia?
Neil.
On 2 Aug 2005, at 08:24, Christopher L. Morrow wrote:
no, but I'd like to... since I'm upgrading and all (for security
reasons
and ipv6 is so much better for security, right? :) )
It has quality of service, too! Let's not forget that!
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Neil J. McRae wrote:
no, but I'd like to... since I'm upgrading and all (for
security reasons and ipv6 is so much better for security, right? :) )
ok so your issue is totally irrelvant to the recent ciscogate
paranoia?
no... not really, not originally, it got
ok so your issue is totally irrelvant to the recent ciscogate
paranoia?
That would depend on what other exploits cisco has slipstream patched
wouldn't it? (honest question as I don't know but it would be nice if cisco
would clarify the situation)
Geo.
George Roettger
Netlink Services
On 7/31/2005 9:06 AM, Janet Sullivan wrote:
Does anyone here have experiences to share (good/bad) about m0n0wall on
soekris devices?
I've used m0n0wall to great effect, and with pleasure, but alas not on a
soekris box -- just on an old dell hanging out in the office. It worked
like a champ.
Good Morning,
Perhaps Susan was not clear enough yesterday. The mailing list
administrative committee would request that you allow this thread to stop.
It has certainly outlived its operational usefulness. I am now reiterating
that request.
Regards,
Chris Malayter
NANOG Mailing List
So yes then.
no... not really, not originally, it got morphed into
something different :( So, the ciscogate paranoia, as near as
I saw, got down to: cisco wont tell people about vulns as
soon as they know about them (or some version of I don't get
to know fast enough about vulns from a
Shane Owens wrote:
Not really an operational question, but an engineering question non-the-less.
This may also not be the most suitable
forum, but there is a large brain trust here that can probably answer my
questions.
Oh, it does. It probably is the only way you get all those ip-phones
On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 08:28:58 CDT, Malayter, Christopher said:
Perhaps Susan was not clear enough yesterday. The mailing list
administrative committee would request that you allow this thread to stop.
It has certainly outlived its operational usefulness. I am now reiterating
that request.
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suspect that adding a This would be more on-topic/relevant on the XYZ list
would help kill it here...
Any suggestions where it would be more relevant?
how about cisco-nsp?
--
Current remote directory is /cisco.
ncftp /cisco dir ios/12.3/12.3.15a/2500/
-rw-rw-r--1 518 11013444 Jul 25 14:50 c2500-c-l.123-15a.bin
-rw-rw-r--1 518 12303148 Jul 25 15:17 c2500-i-l.123-15a.bin
-rw-rw-r--1 518 16191744 Jul 25 14:34
note image size of 11/12/16 mb... note that many (most?) 2500's don't have
16M flash :( many, many referenced before (term servers for instance) are
2mb flash boxes. It's possible that Randy's referring to this sort of
2500. Kindly using himself for a whipping boy instead of the rest of us
I might be wrong, but I thought an image with IPv6 support required
16 MB flash on the 2500?
could be. don't care. don't need ipv6 on terminal servers for oob
access.
Anyway, the upgrade path is there
not really.
randy
Hi Randy,
I might be wrong, but I thought an image with IPv6 support required
16 MB flash on the 2500?
could be. don't care. don't need ipv6 on terminal servers
for oob access.
But the vulnerability applies for only ipv6-enabled devices...
no, but I'd like to... since I'm upgrading and all (for
security reasons and ipv6 is so much better for security, right? :) )
ok so your issue is totally irrelvant to the recent ciscogate
paranoia?
see the smiley?
randy
But the vulnerability applies for only ipv6-enabled devices...
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/707/cisco-sa-20050729-ipv6.shtml
the general problem is definitely wider than the v6 hole. i
believe, but of course could be wrong, that the april fix was a
bit wider than v6.
the blackhat/nanog
The nanog problem was clearly stated. It had nothing to do with the
specific discussion, but more that the discussion contained
instances where folks were being insulting and crude.
Tim Rainier
Randy Bush [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
08/02/2005 03:39 PM
To
Chris Ranch
I forget who suggested it
actually, i was first, but others have followed
but I like the request to move this to cisco-nsp. Any reason
that isn't a better place than NANOG at this stage?
i would guess that, if useful discussion is started on cisco-nsp,
that the momentum will move there and
The nanog problem was clearly stated. It had nothing to do with the
specific discussion, but more that the discussion contained instances
where folks were being insulting and crude.
then address the insults and crudeness.
randy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
no, but I'd like to... since I'm upgrading and all (for security reasons
and ipv6 is so much better for security, right? :) )
It has quality of service, too! Let's not forget that!
I'd be happy with ssh.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version:
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Randy Bush wrote:
even without stiffling the heap check via crashing_already (i.e. a
'fix' is developed for that weakness), is the 30-60 second window
sufficient to do serious operational damage. i.e. what could an
attacker do with a code injection with a mean life as
On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 15:29 -0700, Dan Hollis wrote:
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Randy Bush wrote:
even without stiffling the heap check via crashing_already (i.e. a
'fix' is developed for that weakness), is the 30-60 second window
sufficient to do serious operational damage. i.e. what could an
Operationally relevent, methinks.
W. David Gardner writes in TechWeb News:
[snip]
In the race to meet FCC emergency 911 (e911) requirements, two firms log some
progress, while another seeks a waiver.
Under pressure to meet the FCC mandate to activate 911 service by the end of
the year,
34 matches
Mail list logo
