I am almost there concerning tolerance :) 
Hope this one is just provisory, until IP backbone devices is changed to
support necessary Jumbo frame on this customer. 
anyway I documented all risks involved, PMTU black role, Cisco CPU
increase and bla-bla-bla.

Tks,
Alaerte

-----Original Message-----
From: ext Gert Doering [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 9:06 PM
To: Vidali Alaerte (NSN - BR/Rio de Janeiro)
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Processing Regarding ICMP

Hi,

On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 12:57:28PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Totally agree. Do you know that times you receive request that you 
> just would like to forget?  :)

Well... sometimes I can refuse to do things, and sometimes workarounds
can be found.

And given the number of "it must be do everything, sing and dance, and
at the same time must not cost anything" things I've had to build *and
later on support* in the past, my tolerance for crappy designs is not
overly good these days...

gert

--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
 
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fax: +49-89-35655025
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Reply via email to