On 2/28/14, 10:24 , Leo Bicknell wrote:
What I have always wanted is a way to group configuration, in particular by
customer. Ideally with the ability to see it both as a unified view, and also
as a per-customer view.
For instance:
customer A
interface GigabitEthernet1/2/3.10
On 2/26/14, 16:22 , Ryan Shea wrote:
Howdy network operator cognoscenti,
I'd love to hear your creative and workable solutions for a way to track
in-line the configuration revisions you have on your cisco-like devices.
...
Assume that this version encoding perfectly captures what is on the
On 2/27/14, 12:21 , Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
This has been around for several years now -
http://sourceforge.net/projects/cisco-conf-rep/
But that's just archiving, like rancid, right? Still doesn't have any
correlation to the template-management side of things. While having the
On 2/27/14, 15:52 , Joe Abley wrote:
This is not any kind of sensible answer to the original question, but
the general approach “give ops people a shell on a box with a rancid
repository, encourage them to write scripts that do stuff” has the
potential to cause all kinds of good things to happen
On 10/24/13 17:25 , Job Snijders wrote:
Some might say it took ages to get rancid to do kinda what we want!,
but not all software ages well. One might work in environments where
archived configurations are needed to even start provisioning, one
might desire a separation between actual config and
On 7/3/13 23:41 , Phil Bedard wrote:
The ALU 7750/7450, etc. routers have a separate routing
process/configuration for their OOB mgmt and as of the last time I looked
do not support a default gateway.
Can you still call it a routing process if it's incapable of routing?
-e
On 4/27/13 1:22 , Jima wrote:
On 2013-04-26 23:08, shawn wilson wrote:
There's ways around it for most software but old jetdirect stuff,
switches, routers, ip control systems. Things are going to be 6to4 for a
while. In fact I won't be surprised to see little hardware boxes that do
it for $30
On 1/14/13 9:00 , James Wininger wrote:
All,
We are running into an issue with Brocade where we are finding it difficult to
to graph VLAN interfaces for bits (in/out) across a tagged (trunk) interface.
On Cisco this is not an issue. So what we end up with in Cacti is a blank (no
data) graph.
On 7/26/12 12:45 , Jason Lixfeld wrote:
Hi all,
I'm trying to gauge what operators are doing to handle per-subscriber
Internet access PIR bandwidth in Active E FTTx networks.
I presume operators would want to limit the each subscriber to a
certain PIR, but within that limit, do things like
On 1/31/12 11:42 , chip wrote:
Hi all,
Can anyone point me to ongoing discussion about IPv6 BGP SNMP MIBs
going on in the IETF? As I understand it RFC 4293 was somewhat
abandoned by most vendors. Cisco has a new BGPV4-2 Mib but that still
doesn't address all the needs. While I can try and
On 5/19/11 3:46 , Owen DeLong wrote:
Often, the time
delay in DNS changes can be a blocking factor in addressing load issues
by moving things around quickly. IP addresses can be moved with much
greater agility than the DNS abstraction...
And having persistent IP address-to-service mappings
On Mon, 16 May 2011, Todd Lyons wrote:
Double check the kernel version you have. IIRC kernels before 2.6.20
didn't have the ability to do RELATED,ESTABLISHED in ipv6. This hit
me on a CentOS box that I was using as a gateway. I am unaware if
there is a version of their 2.6.18 that has the
12 matches
Mail list logo
