On Thursday 31 May 2007 08:35, Gert Doering wrote:
Just to correct this small bit: default in IOS for packet
ACLs is default-permit *if the ACL is completely
missing*.
But usually you're dead in the water as soon as you
copy-and-paste a new version of the ACL and the first line
gets
Hi!
I'm searching info about the cluster function on the C3550 platform.
Does the cluster functions only control managment?
Meaning: Will I break something else if I remove the cluster commands?
Thanks
/Fredrik Jacobsson
___
cisco-nsp mailing list
Hi,
We are currently looking at Cisco 8340s and IPANEMA IP engines to deploy
an application optimization service for one of our customers.
These devices would have to be inserted in an existing point-to-point
connection which is using a /30 subnet.
For management of the device I would have
Hi there,
Can these boxes be placed off-path? You will need an unused interface on the
router or free port on adjacent switch to place it off-path/one-armed.
Or maybe use Juniper WX, they can be placed inline or off-path, as required.
HTH
Cheers
Alex
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL
Basically the same.
Rodney
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 10:15:25PM -0400, Lamar Owen wrote:
On Wednesday 30 May 2007, Rodney Dunn wrote:
Not aimed at Justin but to set the record straight..
On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 02:35:16PM -0400, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
On Thu, 31 May 2007, Kanagaraj
Vincent De Keyzer wrote:
That's what 'normal IOS' does by default, unless you have 'no ip unreach'
configured on the ingress interface :-)
What are the downsides of running ip unreachable? It was always presented
to me as a bad thing...
The usual and customary argument is that it facilitates
Phil Mayers wrote:
Kurt Bales wrote:
Hello All,
Just a follow up to this post. I got into work this morning and found this
problem occuring in overdrive!
As I believe I mentioned in a previous post, It's normal for the client
to do an ARP *request* for the IP it's offered; that is how
I used to work for a company that monitored hundreds of customers
using Openview, we ran the OVO agent on CCM, Unity, IPCC, CER... all
Windows...
Worked great and it is Cisco approved.
Jonathan
On 5/31/07, Miller, Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Most of our network servers are monitored by
Wow, you don't frequently here Open View and work great in the same time!:)
It does draw pretty circles though!
- Original Message -
From: Jonathan Charles [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Miller, Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Thursday, May 31,
Anyone know this? I meant to type show spanning tree int BLAH something
and hit enter prematurely and got this!
sw01#show spanning-tree in
this[0] = 1;
this[1] = 10;
this[2] = 80;
this[3] = 110;
this[4] = 120;
this[5] = 140;
this[6] = 150;
this[7] = 180;
this[8] = 200;
this[9] = 210;
this[10] =
Hi
We are seeing 2-4% packet loss on a 60Mbps link with 3725 when traffic
reaches about 35-40Mbps (based 30s load interval) (FYI the circuit has
been tested multiple times and is clean). I suspect that the traffic
is bursting to 60Mbps for short period and causing the loss.
The Cisco command
Is this chassis powered via 110v or 220v? Break out a multi-meter and
monitor the voltage over a period of time. Post sh power to the list
too if you would. Interesting problem...
Justin
Rick Kunkel wrote:
Hello all,
Many thanks for help in the past. I'm hoping someone will have
Arie Vayner \(avayner\) writes:
Danny,
With iBGP the timers for BGP are not really important... You
actually need to worry about the IGP convergence.
The reason for that is that usually when a link fails, you don't
really expect the BGP session to the RR to go down, but just use the
Can you run the router on just PS1 or PS2 (does everything work properly
there?) Secondly, have you tried inverting the cables providing power and
thus the circuits and repeating your test, see if PS1 still fails or if PS2
now fails with things inverted. Are you powering each supply with a
Greetings all-
I have a customer for whom we've built a Remote Access DSL network. We
recieve the PPPoE sessions from Bell, and using the authenticate before
forward feature, have radius setup to return attributes that cause our LNS
to forward that customer's session to them via another L2TP
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
Anyone ever encounter this issue?:
Using a Black Box TS027A-R2 ethernet tester to test the 10/100 ports rather
than connect a device to every port on a WS-C3524-XL-EN. The Black Box tests
ports successfully. Then to compare, the WS-C3524-XL-EN is configured and
connected to devices rather than
We are looking to pick up a good 24/48 port Gigabit switch for some basic L2
aggregation duties. The main criteria are wire rate performance and rock solid
stability. Would appreciate to hear from anyone using the WS-C2960G-24TC-L or
WS-C2960G-48TC-L for this purpose.
TIA.
--Mike
Hey everyone.. update time.
Problem was not the Redback - I take back all the evil swear words I yelled
at Redback and point them back to Cisco.
Basically, c7200p-advipservicesk9-mz.124-11.T1.bin is crap.
Upgraded to c7200p-advipservicesk9-mz.124-11.T2.bin and all is working fine,
19 matches
Mail list logo
