On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 8:43 AM, a nice guy wrote in private mail:
I can't believe this isn't simple! I just want to change the PVC on
the [expletive] ATM cells and push them back the same way they came,
how can that be so difficult?
at the risk of sounding stupid - isn't that what an ATM
Nathan wrote:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Nathan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't believe this isn't simple! I just want to change the PVC on
the [expletive] ATM cells and push them back the same way they came,
how can that be so difficult?
Are you looking for the local switching
I believe the Cisco 7300 series is completely different. The basic
architecture of the Cisco 7200 series is really old (but good like a
swiss-army-knife) and I assume they are not able to change anything.
maybe a little bit like the A20-Gate :)
2008/10/23 Elmar K. Bins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:10 AM, Joe Maimon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nathan wrote:
I can't believe this isn't simple! I just want to change the PVC on
the [expletive] ATM cells and push them back the same way they came,
how can that be so difficult?
Are you looking for the local switching
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:00 AM, I wrote:
Well, yes, why not, anything goes . . .
As far as anything goes, shouldn't it be possible to tunnel L2 packets
over L2TP between two 871s, ARPs and all? It will kill MTU, but I'm
past caring.
Do I have to set up IPSEC? Can I set up several tunnels
On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 22:19:40 +0200
Nathan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Oliver Boehmer
(oboehmer)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nathan wrote on Monday, October 20, 2008 10:29 AM:
In effect, I want to extend the VC coming in on one PE
so that it
(L3) terminates on
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Alex Wågberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe this will help?
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0s/feature/guide/fsaal22.html
At first glance it probably would, but I'd have a hard time justifying
the exchange of a 7206 G1 running nicely at about 30-40%
Very appreciated Ryan. Thanks for your reply
--- On Wed, 10/22/08, Ryan Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Ryan Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [c-nsp] Restric access in a VPN tunnel
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2008, 9:46 AM
Define each protocol and port
We use them as a sort of ³port replicator² for routers like the 7206 where
we need a few more ethernet ports. Rock solid little box. The UNI/NNI port
configuration is slightly odd but I can see the benefit in a metro
application. We¹re using the ME6524 for our metro stuff though. Doesn¹t
have
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:31, David Curran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We use them as a sort of port replicator for routers like the 7206 where
we need a few more ethernet ports. Rock solid little box. The UNI/NNI port
configuration is slightly odd but I can see the benefit in a metro
You'll have to take off sysopt connection permit-ipsec before those ACLs
take effect.
Note that this may affect other VPNs if you have them.
tv
- Original Message -
From: JR Colmenares [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Ryan Bradley [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Cisco NSP Forum
cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Bruce Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I remember correctly, the 1751 supports L2TPv3. You could add another
Ethernet interface to the 1751 (the WIC-4ESW is handy for that, or
WIC-1ENET), insert it between the 871 and customer, and bridge the Ethernets
Nathan wrote:
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 5:24 PM, Bruce Robertson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I remember correctly, the 1751 supports L2TPv3. You could add another
Ethernet interface to the 1751 (the WIC-4ESW is handy for that, or
WIC-1ENET), insert it between the 871 and customer, and bridge
Of course the 1751 will support the DSL too...
Bruce Robertson, President/CEO +1-775-348-7299
Great Basin Internet Services, Inc.company-wide fax: +1-775-348-9412
http://www.greatbasin.net my efax: +1-775-201-1553
Nathan wrote:
On Fri, Oct
Hi
thank you for your help
I still have questions
1/ I follow your instruction
config#clock calendar-valid
the command: show clock is 17:34 xx UTC
Now my time is 14:11. why there is still 3 hours
ahead?
2/ I don't have this command name-server
but I check there looks like command
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:19:10AM +0200, Stephan Lochner wrote:
I believe the Cisco 7300 series is completely different. The basic
architecture of the Cisco 7200 series is really old (but good like a
swiss-army-knife) and I assume they are not able to change anything.
maybe a little bit
If I remember correctly, the 1751 supports L2TPv3. You could add
another Ethernet interface to the 1751 (the WIC-4ESW is handy for that,
or WIC-1ENET), insert it between the 871 and customer, and bridge the
Ethernets through, without killing MTU.
Bruce Robertson, President/CEO
Why cant he leave his acl for the crypto map alone and simply apply the
relevant access list on the interface to restrict specific entries? Will
this affect his vpn (don't think so) ?
Regards,
Mario
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
I have been trying to figure out how to do this and maybe someone will be able
to help me out.
I have two ISP connections ISP ATT and ISP Cogent.
(ISP Cogent)(ISP ATT)
| |
RO --- R1
ATT would be used for primarily internet and access to
That's where he needs to apply it. Once the sysopt has been removed, the VPN
traffic will get checked against the outside inteface ACL.
The crypto map ACL is for the proxies to define which traffic traverses the VPN.
- Original Message -
From: Mario Spinthiras
To: Tony Varriale
Hi
Does anyone know what is wrong with these commands (or how this could be
accomplished)?:
neighbor 11.0.0.1 advertise-map OUT-BGP-ISP_B-RMAP exist-map DEFAULT-ROUTE-ISP_A
neighbor 11.0.0.1 advertise-map OUT-ISP_B-BGP-FAILOVER-RMAP not-exist-map
DEFAULT-ROUTE-ISP_A
I'm just trying to send
Tom,
Instead of not advertising a certain prefix, there is another alternative using
BGP communities which are recognized by your upstream providers.
Take a look for what Cogent supports for example (better ask them for the
official list...):
http://www.onesc.net/communities/as174/
You could
Arie,
Thank you for your response. In my situation, where everything is normal, I am
actually sending their specific communities for them not to advertise my route
to their peers. My only problem is how to change that automatically when my
default route from ATT goes away (ATT circuit does
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Marko Milivojevic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 11:31, David Curran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We use them as a sort of port replicator for routers like the 7206 where
we need a few more ethernet ports. Rock solid little box. The UNI/NNI port
If it's purely just for failover (ie you don't want to get billed for
traffic down your failover link while your active is up) then why not just
send the community:
174:70 70 Set customer route local preference to 70
This will make them use ATT's path until the ATT link goes down.
Ben
Hello Chris:
On 10/23/08 3:50 PM, Chris Gauthier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
That's where part of my difficulty lies. Our SAN traffic is going to be
increasing over time, currently using 4 individual 1GB Copper links, not
including the 2x1GB links each server requires. Additionally, we
Ah my apologies I should have read your original email, your problem is a
little more trickier than that.
After having read your original one though I believe you could probably do
this with an event manager task used to watch logging for bgp neighbour
failure you could trigger it to modify your
27 matches
Mail list logo
