Alan,
For energywise, I found CSCte69094 which should fix the issue in
12.2(53)SE1...
Arie
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Alan Buxey
Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 20:49
To: David Freedman
Cc:
i have cisco router 1841 configured for dial in using vpn client
the user obtains an IP address from a local pool configured on the router
i want to be able to assign a username from the tacacs and each user obtain a
Hi John,
My piece of l2tp config:
l2tp-class class-name
authentication
more config lines
password 7 level-7-encrypted-pass
more config lines
Martin
cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net wrote on 07/07/2010 07:14:
Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 06:49:04PM +0100, Alan Buxey:
Hi,
I have an issue
Dears
if i want to include an existing LIR under the my own LIR what is the procedure
for that?
i.e. i want to make it only one LIR
_
Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by
Thanks all
From: jon.harald.bo...@hafslund.no
To: eng_m...@hotmail.com; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2010 13:04:19 +0200
Subject: SV: [c-nsp] RIPE LIR
Please ask RIPE NCC:
lir-h...@ripe.net
https://lirportal.ripe.net/lirportal/contact.html
Jon
-Opprinnelig
Mohammad Khalil wrote:
Dears
if i want to include an existing LIR under the my own LIR what is the
procedure for that?
i.e. i want to make it only one LIR
You want an LIR Merger, see RIPE301
(http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/mergers.html)
Dave.
Dear All,
Thank you for your help. The SNMP is working now. Due to my pix is using 6.3(5)
which only the SNMP Version 1 can be used.
Thanks,
Edward
From: rw...@zyedge.com
To: edward_io...@hotmail.com; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net;
sunny.ie...@esprit.com
Subject: RE: [c-nsp] snmp
Is anyone using SDR? any problems , lessons learned, or best practices
you can share?
thanx in advance,
Joe
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at
no
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Manu Chao linux.ya...@gmail.com wrote:
Is the Nexus 5000 Fabric Manager Server License required for FEX N2K
support?
Thanks
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-...@puck.nether.net
Thank you for your answer.
At 10:22 06/07/2010, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Tue, 6 Jul 2010, RAZAFINDRATSIFA Rivo Tahina wrote:
Hi all,
We plan to use a 7204 NPE-G2 with 3 STM-1 (PA-POS-OC3SMI ),
will the 7206 NPE-G2 support 3x155Mbps traffic?
According to my interpretation of
Hi All,
I wanted to see if anyone knows what's going on with my basic access-list.
It's really more annoying than anything, but. So I type in this list:
Rtr (config) #access-list 10 remark NTP access
Rtr (config) #access-list 10 permit 10.1.0.151
Rtr (config) #access-list 10 permit 10.1.0.154
On 7/6/2010 3:10 PM, Troy Beisigl wrote:
Not much to the config. I have included both sides of the connection.
the other end is a 6500
7507:
interface GigabitEthernet6/0/0
description feed to cat1.3/6
bandwidth 100
ip address X.X.X.X 255.255.255.240
load-interval 30
negotiation auto
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Cisco Security Advisory: Hard-Coded SNMP Community Names in Cisco
Industrial Ethernet 3000 Series Switches Vulnerability
Advisory ID: cisco-sa-20100707-snmp
Revision 1.0
For Public Release 2010 July 07 1600 UTC (GMT
Hi all,
We have a very strange problem on a C6500 running 12.2(33)SXH4
We are using Auto-RP for Rendez-vous point distribution and this is working
fine, only on one switch the
RP-discovery packet is ignored. See message below from debug ip pim
auto-rp
Auto-RP(0): Received RP-discovery, from
On Wed, 7 Jul 2010, Pete Templin wrote:
Wait a minute. GE interfaces on a 7500 are supposed to be special - GEIP
comes on a special VIP2-50 that says GEIP, and GEIP+ comes on a special
VIP4-?? that says GEIP+. I've never done GE on 7500, but I'd think you
shouldn't be swapping out the
Understood about the speed limit on this chassis for Gigabit. This is
just a limited time run until the new routers come in. This chassis
would never see anything more than 200mbps.
-Troy
On Jul 7, 2010, at 9:19 AM, Jon Lewis wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jul 2010, Pete Templin wrote:
Wait a
Hi Pete,
Did not switch out the underlying VIP in this case. We installed a
VIP4-80 with a PA-GE. I have a few other chassis that are running this
fine, but they are running older IOS versions than this one. Just
thought it was unusual that we would see such high CPU on the VIP. I
get
Thanks. That sort of worked. I was doing a 'no access-list 10' before I added
the new list. But this time I reordered them and it worked. So I added the
remark, added .154, then added .151. weird.
Ruben Alvarez
Technical Contractor | NWEA
PHONE 503.624.1951 | FAX 503.639.7873
DIRECT
This is part of standard ACL optimization. This optimization completely
disregards comments. It's annoying and a bug was filed eons ago about this
and it was junked as part of expected behavior. See CSCdu55701.
-Pete
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Ruben Alvarez ruben.alva...@nwea.orgwrote:
http://www.wirelessinnovation.org
On 07/07/2010 04:39 PM, My Name wrote:
Is anyone using SDR? any problems , lessons learned, or best practices
you can share?
thanx in advance,
Joe
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
On 7/7/10 1:35 PM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:
http://www.wirelessinnovation.org
On 07/07/2010 04:39 PM, My Name wrote:
Is anyone using SDR? any problems , lessons learned, or best practices
you can share?
There's an app for that!
http://digitalconfections.com/
--
Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880
Sorry guys, I meant Cisco Secure Domain Routers for the CRS platform
thanx for replying though.
Joe
On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 4:43 PM, Jay Hennigan j...@west.net wrote:
On 7/7/10 1:35 PM, Guillaume FORTAINE wrote:
http://www.wirelessinnovation.org
On 07/07/2010 04:39 PM, My Name wrote:
I am curious if others have experienced this problem.
We are setting up new solutions that require routing (not just
switching) of jumbo frames between racks. We'll set up a simple vlan
extended across the core with 3750E's at the edges:
system mtu jumbo 9000
system mtu routing 9000
On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 05:09:41PM -0500, David DeSimone wrote:
My only guess is that the jumbo MTU routing attribute somehow isn't
applied to the VLAN when the router is initially configured, because
there are currently no ports showing link in the VLAN, so the VLAN is
invisibly admin down
We're deploying a UCS setup that involves
some of the 20 port fabric interconnect
switches which basically connect our UCS
blade chassis to our EMC storage. I asked
the sales rep today if we could plug a backup
server at 10gig into one of the unused ports
on one of the 6120's and she initially
Ahh. I thought you were talking about multicast 'ip sdr' (aka SAP) commands.
Was going to comment about the control-plane issues you will see enabling that
on the routers.
- Jared
On Jul 7, 2010, at 5:06 PM, My Name wrote:
Sorry guys, I meant Cisco Secure Domain Routers for the CRS platform
Short answer, No, you don't want to do that.
Long answer:
There are two types of ports on the UCS 6100, Uplink ports, and
Server ports. At this time, only the 2104 FEX modules inside the
blade chassis can be connected to Server ports.
The default and preferred mode of the 6100 is End
What is the cheapest Cisco desktop switch that supports Q-in-Q? Is it the
ME-3400G-2CS-A? We prefer the encapsulation dot1q x second-dot1q y
approach.
And why does one page on Cisco's site say:
Q. What is 802.1Q Tunneling? Is it an IEEE standard?
A. With 802.1Q Tunneling, a service provider's
If you have the 6120s deployed in End Host Mode, then this is not
currently possible. If you are running them in switch mode then they
behave like a normal switch and you can do this setup.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps10278/products_configuration_example09186a0080af3171.shtml
To
On Jul 7, 2010, at 10:54 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
And why does one page on Cisco's site say:
Q. What is 802.1Q Tunneling? Is it an IEEE standard?
A. With 802.1Q Tunneling, a service provider's switch can tag on a second
802.1Q tag on top of the customer's 802.1Q tag. This feature is sometimes
Hopefully Cisco can update that page.
I was working on a Foundry/Brocade this week trying to some Q-in-Q - do you
mean 0x8100 versus 0x9100? Looks like 802.1ad uses 0x88a8.
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Dale W. Carder [mailto:dwcar...@wisc.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2010 11:09 PM
08.07.2010 01:09, David DeSimone пишет:
I am curious if others have experienced this problem.
We are setting up new solutions that require routing (not just
switching) of jumbo frames between racks. We'll set up a simple vlan
extended across the core with 3750E's at the edges:
system mtu
32 matches
Mail list logo
