On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Chris Marget ch...@marget.com wrote:
I tried two operating systems and four browsers yesterday. I couldn't
upload files that were just a few hundred KB.
That was on Friday. Nothing has changed on my end
(hardware/software/network), but I'm able to upload files
Hi Chris / All,
Thanks for alerting us to this problem. The Support Case Manager team
put a fix (we hope) in this weekend.
Glad it is now working for you.
Sincerely,
David.
On 2/3/2014 10:12 AM, Chris Marget wrote:
On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Chris Marget ch...@marget.com wrote:
I
Hi list,
FYI, Support Case Manager now shows this message:
UPDATE:Sharing Files with TAC via FTP
Please be aware that using Support Case Manager's 'Attach Files' feature is
the
preferred method to share files with TAC by uploading files directly to your
support case. However, if you use
You can also e-mail stuff to att...@cisco.com as long as the case (C3) number
is in the subject line.
- Jared
On Feb 3, 2014, at 10:30 AM, David White, Jr. (dwhitejr) dwhit...@cisco.com
wrote:
Hi Chris / All,
Thanks for alerting us to this problem. The Support Case Manager team
put a
] TAC hits a new record level of aggravation...
On Sun, 3 Nov 2013, Jeff Kell wrote:
Customer support died a decade ago.
For the front-end stuff, sure.
To be fair, and to give credit where credit is due, I have dealt with
some
TAC engineers who have been incredibly helpful, professional
://www.ccie18473.net
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
Justin M. Streiner
Sent: domingo, 3 de Novembro de 2013 14:35
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] TAC hits a new record level of aggravation...
On Sun, 3 Nov 2013
-
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
Justin M. Streiner
Sent: domingo, 3 de Novembro de 2013 14:35
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] TAC hits a new record level of aggravation...
On Sun, 3 Nov 2013, Jeff Kell wrote:
Customer
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
Justin M. Streiner
Sent: domingo, 3 de Novembro de 2013 14:35
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] TAC hits a new record level of aggravation...
On Sun, 3 Nov 2013, Jeff Kell wrote
-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
Justin M. Streiner
Sent: domingo, 3 de Novembro de 2013 14:35
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] TAC hits a new record level of aggravation...
On Sun, 3 Nov 2013, Jeff Kell wrote:
Customer support died
: domingo, 3 de Novembro de 2013 14:35
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] TAC hits a new record level of aggravation...
On Sun, 3 Nov 2013, Jeff Kell wrote:
Customer support died a decade ago.
For the front-end stuff, sure.
To be fair, and to give credit where credit is due
On 02/01/2014 09:46 AM, Jeff Kell wrote:
Could we petition for an HTML 1.0, old-school, no-javascript, no Java
apps, alternative TAC site?
Add an explicit no JavaScript to the mix and I sign. :)
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Of
Justin M. Streiner
Sent: domingo, 3 de Novembro de 2013 14:35
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] TAC hits a new record level of aggravation...
On Sun, 3 Nov 2013, Jeff Kell wrote:
Customer support died a decade ago.
For the front-end stuff, sure.
To be fair, and to give credit
On 11/3/13, 6:31 AM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
That's a shame. I don't understand the need to replace something that
worked reliably with something that doesn't solely because it's 'sexy'
(no, really, it isn't...) or web-2.0-y.
Because you can't ever be done therefore it needs a rewrite
On Mon, 4 Nov 2013, Seth Mattinen wrote:
Because you can't ever be done therefore it needs a rewrite into the
cool new thing. Except Cisco's web team is somewhat behind; they're on
Java applets right now. Give them another 5-10 years to discover jQuery.
And the cool new thing will never be
On Nov 4, 2013, at 5:56 PM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
On Mon, 4 Nov 2013, Seth Mattinen wrote:
Because you can't ever be done therefore it needs a rewrite into the
cool new thing. Except Cisco's web team is somewhat behind; they're on
Java applets right now. Give them another 5-10 years to
On Tuesday, November 05, 2013 12:56:27 AM Justin M. Streiner
wrote:
And the cool new thing will never be 'done' either.
Perpetual development is often a bad thing because it
leads to loss of focus, scope creep, and lots of other
buzzwords that generally have a negative connotation.
Cisco's
On 11/3/2013 1:41 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
On Nov 3, 2013, at 12:08 PM, Jeff Kell jeff-k...@utc.edu wrote:
If enough of us complain... maybe.
Plenty of people inside and outside of Cisco have complained vociferously, to
no avail. It's unlikely to change.
Maybe we should all go back to
On Sunday, November 03, 2013 07:28:18 AM John Neiberger
wrote:
It was in beta for months before they released it
publicly. I think the current version is vastly better
than when I first saw it. But I guess they didn't have
any Mac users in the beta. :)
Of course, no one at Cisco uses a Mac
On Sunday, November 03, 2013 07:52:33 AM Jeff Kell wrote:
Maybe we should all go back to the phone call interface.
Will probably get Bangalore, but who knows. Refuse the
web garbage :)
Make every case a Priority 1 case (call if you the
description command on your CLI fails, as a P1 log) -
Hi,
On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 09:20:07PM -0600, Alex Presse wrote:
It's the new java update - unsigned code gets user verification windows.
Cisco (and everybody else) will need to update all their java delivered user
interfaces to avoid this annoyance.
Why on earth does enter information for
I thought that by clicking each warning it was just a hidden way to
authorize Obama to spy your network issue LMAO
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at
: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark
Tinka
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2013 1:09 AM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] TAC hits a new record level of aggravation...
On Sunday, November 03, 2013 07:52:33 AM Jeff Kell wrote:
Maybe we should all go
On 11/3/2013 7:46 AM, Chuck Church wrote:
It's not just the TAC tool that has been suck-ified. The replacement for
the dynamic configuration tool sucks. Tried it a few days ago, first thing
it asks for is a whole bunch of customer info. I just wanted to verify if
there is a non-EOS OC-3 POS
On Sun, 3 Nov 2013, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
On Nov 3, 2013, at 7:29 AM, Justin M. Streiner
strei...@cluebyfour.org wrote:
It would be great if Cisco focus-group tested these 'enhancements'
before rolling them out, and knock it off with the Java nonsense.
They've been going in this direction
On Sun, 3 Nov 2013, Jeff Kell wrote:
Customer support died a decade ago.
For the front-end stuff, sure.
To be fair, and to give credit where credit is due, I have dealt with some
TAC engineers who have been incredibly helpful, professional, and
responsive. For the things I generally reach
I had the opportunity to open a TAC case last week... and was greeted
by the new website...
I use Firefox with NoScript, Ghostery, AdBlock, and some other plugins
that require their own unique whitelisting to get cisco.com to work at
all, and even more if you need to login to anything.
I have
Have you try using MS Explorer?
Sent from my iPhone
On 2013/11/03, at 7:53, Jeff Kell jeff-k...@utc.edu wrote:
I had the opportunity to open a TAC case last week... and was greeted
by the new website...
I use Firefox with NoScript, Ghostery, AdBlock, and some other plugins
that require
So Cisco is now sleeping with Microsoft? The human network suddenly
requires Internet Explorer? And specific Java for the Oracle contingent?
Years ago, it just worked. Might not have been HTML5 or Ajax or Web2.0
but the damned thing worked. Everytime.
Jeff
On 11/2/2013 9:23 PM, Engel wrote:
Also make sure you use IE6, because apparently thats what most users
prefer. Those pesky newer version and non MS browsers can be a real
heachache.
:)
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 9:23 PM, Engel engel.lab...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you try using MS Explorer?
Sent from my iPhone
On 2013/11/03, at
On Sat, 2013-11-02 at 21:37 -0400, Jeff Kell wrote:
So Cisco is now sleeping with Microsoft?
When I read the original post it seemed to me that Cisco sure as you
know what wanted you to use a Windows box to access their T.A.C. site.
I really hope I am wrong because I will never
It's the new java update - unsigned code gets user verification windows. Cisco
(and everybody else) will need to update all their java delivered user
interfaces to avoid this annoyance.
Sent from mobile; please excuse brevity typos.
On Nov 2, 2013, at 19:46, chris tknch...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/2/2013 11:20 PM, Alex Presse wrote:
It's the new java update - unsigned code gets user verification windows.
Cisco (and everybody else) will need to update all their java delivered user
interfaces to avoid this annoyance.
And we need Java to submit a case, exactly why?
Plain old
On Sat, 2 Nov 2013, Jeff Kell wrote:
I had the opportunity to open a TAC case last week... and was greeted
by the new website...
Try many of these same tasks on a Mac, and you get to add the great
Apple/Oracle Java pissing contest on top of it. Fun times... :(
It would be great if Cisco
+1 for please remove the need for java or any plugins and go the elegance
of simplicity
On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Jeff Kell jeff-k...@utc.edu wrote:
On 11/2/2013 11:20 PM, Alex Presse wrote:
It's the new java update - unsigned code gets user verification windows.
Cisco (and everybody
On Nov 3, 2013, at 7:29 AM, Justin M. Streiner strei...@cluebyfour.org wrote:
It would be great if Cisco focus-group tested these 'enhancements' before
rolling them out, and knock it off with the Java nonsense.
They've been going in this direction for the last 10 years - it's doubtful that
On 11/3/2013 12:52 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote:
On Nov 3, 2013, at 7:29 AM, Justin M. Streiner strei...@cluebyfour.org
wrote:
It would be great if Cisco focus-group tested these 'enhancements' before
rolling them out, and knock it off with the Java nonsense.
They've been going in this
It would be great if Cisco focus-group tested these 'enhancements' before
rolling them out, and knock it off with the Java nonsense.
It was in beta for months before they released it publicly. I think
the current version is vastly better than when I first saw it. But I
guess they didn't have
The annoyance could be avoided by removing Java requirements from the
website.
On 11/02/2013 08:20 PM, Alex Presse wrote:
It's the new java update - unsigned code gets user verification windows.
Cisco (and everybody else) will need to update all their java delivered user
interfaces to avoid
On Nov 3, 2013, at 12:08 PM, Jeff Kell jeff-k...@utc.edu wrote:
If enough of us complain... maybe.
Plenty of people inside and outside of Cisco have complained vociferously, to
no avail. It's unlikely to change.
---
Roland
39 matches
Mail list logo
