Must by doing something wrong!?!?!
MSFC#dir bootflash:
Directory of bootflash:/
1 -rw- 1673996 Jul 07 1917 04:33:52
c6msfc2-boot-mz.121-7a.E1.bin
2 -rw- 2037 Apr 11 1918 23:04:52 running-config
3 -rw- 12278476 Jul 12 1918 21:25:46
c6msfc2-jsv-mz.121-8b.E11
15204352 bytes total (1249456 bytes free)
MSFC#delete bootflash:c6msfc2-jsv-mz.121-8b.E11
Delete filename [c6msfc2-jsv-mz.121-8b.E11]?
Delete bootflash:c6msfc2-jsv-mz.121-8b.E11? [confirm]
MSFC#dir bootflash:
Directory of bootflash:/
1 -rw- 1673996 Jul 07 1917 04:33:52
c6msfc2-boot-mz.121-7a.E1.bin
2 -rw- 2037 Apr 11 1918 23:04:52 running-config
15204352 bytes total (1249456 bytes free)
MSFC#undelete 3 bootflash:
MSFC#dir
Directory of bootflash:/
1 -rw- 1673996 Jul 07 1917 04:33:52
c6msfc2-boot-mz.121-7a.E1.bin
2 -rw- 2037 Apr 11 1918 23:04:52 running-config
3 -rw- 12278476 Jul 12 1918 21:25:46
c6msfc2-jsv-mz.121-8b.E11
15204352 bytes total (1249456 bytes free)
Dave
ospf wrote:
>
> Hi Group
> I have to upgrade IOS in bootflash: (for MSFC2, 6509)
> But I can not erase the old version.
> - Delete bootflash: command can apply but not take effect .
> Image file still stay in bootflash (of course I didn't try to erase the
boot
> image)
> - Copy tftp bootflash: command doesn't have erase old image option.
>
> I'm now booting the route processor from tftp server, but my customer
didn't
> like this solution.
>
> The bootflash is protected from deleting ? rite ?
> Anyone have experience with this situation.
>
> Thank you in advance
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "MADMAN"
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 1:10 AM
> Subject: Re: Supervisor Engines [7:50279]
>
> > There is a big differance between the supI, supII and supIII, The
> > sup1 is for the 4003, the supII and III are for the 4006. The supI and
> > II run CATOS whereas the supIII runs IOS like a 6500 in native mode.
> > The supIII has layer 3 capabilities, with a supII you require a seperate
> > card for layer 3. supII has a forwarding rate of 18MPPS, supIII 48MPPS.
> >
> > One odd thing, Cisco is sooooo consistent, with the supIII ethernet
> > interfaces are switchports by default, a 6500 running native are routed
> > ports by default!!
> >
> > The supIII will be supporting IPX this fall but only process switching
> > so don't plan on running the supIII ipx in a larger ipx environment.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > Stuart Pittwood wrote:
> > >
> > > We're looking into replacing some of our old hubs/switches with a
single
> > > 4000 series switch.
> > >
> > > My question is what is the difference between supervisor engines I, II,
> > > III?
> > >
> > > Any help appreciated
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Stu
> > --
> > David Madland
> > Sr. Network Engineer
> > CCIE# 2016
> > Qwest Communications Int. Inc.
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > 612-664-3367
> >
> > "Emotion should reflect reason not guide it"
--
David Madland
Sr. Network Engineer
CCIE# 2016
Qwest Communications Int. Inc.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
612-664-3367
"Emotion should reflect reason not guide it"
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=50304&t=50279
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
