An entity claiming to be Robert Boyle ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: At 10:07 PM 5/16/2007, Mark Rogaski wrote:
:
: Attenuation issues do not generally cause LCVs. This is an issue somewhere
: between the interface and the last device to regenerate the signal (either
: the mux or any media
Hi,
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 09:12:47AM -0700, Rick Kunkel wrote:
Here's the bonehead part. Would the standard way to deal with routing
between these be to make a VLAN Interface on the 6509? I made a VLAN 12
interface and gave it the IP address 2.2.2.1. Works great.
That's the way to do
In trying to troubleshoot a multicast problem, I have discovered that I
don't fully understand part of the multicast process and so would be
grateful if I could get an answer to the following. When a client streams
traffic out to a multicast group, I had assumed that it would treat the
traffic as
Matthew Lange [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
* Implement blackhole routing on the Internet interface, using the Bogon
list[3]
Actually, I would put static bogon lists in the common but bad
advice section, right there with turning off ICMP (sorry, RobT!).
Why? Well, except for certain networks
On 5/16/07, Chris Woodfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
show platform hardware capacity gives you some pretty good data
that may be useful in this situation. I think SXD was the first minor
rev to support it, but I could be wrong.
-C
Thanks for the info.
FWIW, I've got it in 12.2(18)SXF4 but
I have a 7206 with NPE-G1, upgraded from 12.2.15T11 last night to
12.3.22 lawful intercept and simultaneously taking from 256m to 1024m of
memory.
The system has BGP peers and a couple of thousand DSL customers
attached (I know, I know, OS and memory upgrade are part of me splitting
it
So, you're turning up a new connection with 2100 customers on it (or ARP
entries at least) and DHCP is slowing right down?
If I understand this right, this is normal behaviour on one of our cable
routers (CTMS router) when we do maintenance and bring 500+ customers back
online, it takes a
I disabled auto qos and I still cannot apply the service policy. Any
other ideas?
Dan.
Phil Bedard wrote:
Having auto qos enabled won't allow you to use a user-defined output
policy on that interface.
Phil
On May 17, 2007, at 11:33 AM, Dan wrote:
post output of show tech would be a start...remove passwords of course.
My magic wand that I use to conjure up explanations
without any info broke last week.
Or contact Cisco on your support contract.
Ted
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf
There is no business out there to want.
Go to whoever sold you the Cisco hardware.
The margins on smartnet contracts are virtually zero,
and the amount of work that Cisco requires the reseller to
do to register them now, costs much more than the margin.
Also once you get a contract, you can
TCIS List Acct wrote:
The Cisco VPN Client is included with all models of Cisco VPN 3000 Series
concentrators and Cisco ASA 5500 Series security appliances (excluding ASA
5505), and most Cisco PIX 500 security appliances
I couldn't find any other mention of the excluding ASA 5505 verbage
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I got problems with SRB when deployed to production. The BGP Router
process constantly eats ~70% cpu, versus 10% with SRA3. Same config,
doing a lot of ipv4 BGP, some ipv6 BGP, IPv4 Multicast BGP, and some
VPNv4. Haven't been able to reproduce
Do you have an example of egress queing?
Thanks,
Dan.
Brian Turnbow wrote:
As far I know you cannot police outbound traffic on the ports of the 2960.
You can play with the egress queing on the port to limit the bandwidth.
Check out the qos part in the configuration guide.
Regards
Brian
Hey list!
We currently use PIX running 7.2.2 as our vpn end point for our
remote access users and lan2lan connections. The LAN2LAN connections
seem to remain stable while we get 3 to 4 complaints about the remote
access VPN disconnecting users. Looking at the syslog reports seem to
be
14 matches
Mail list logo
