If you are purely Ethernet then the cheapest Cisco solution would be an
ASA5505
Be aware that it's basically useless for more than a handful unique IP
addresses (20 or so) without a Security plus license upgrade for the 5505.
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
I've interpreted the warning as Cisco removing their support and liability
requirements for the optics themselves, My SFP doesn't work, help. I
wouldn't expect any data issues whatsoever. They'll continue to support the
switch as normal for non-gbic issues. I've been running service
It sounds like you should be focusing more on a layer 3 solution than a layer 2
solution - run an IGP between your 3560s or 3750s. Even if you did have proper
fiber connectivity between locations, you should be isolating VTP (if
_absolutely_ required) to single sites. You should also
a router(or
two, using FHRP).
As far as shared 'router' vlans or subnets, this is completely normal and
common for distribution/core networks.
-JP Senior
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Erik Nelson
Sent: 01
I use riverbed steelhead appliances on a few links ranging from 40ms to 240ms.
I tend to get about 85% savings on actual traffic that goes through. I think
what is very important to know is the type of traffic you expect to optimize.
Riverbed is -very- good at MAPI and CIFS traffic, which is
type inspect OUTSIDE-SELF
Thanks for your time, everyone!
-JP Senior
CCIE #24838 (RS)
The contents of this message may contain confidential and/or privileged
subject matter. If this message has been received in error, please contact
the sender and delete all copies. Like other forms
on these providers, so I'll have to deal with ipsec/gre overhead.
I don't do anything crazy blocking with ICMP, but I'm still hesitant to move
forward with such a design.
-JP Senior
The contents of this message may contain confidential and/or privileged
subject matter. If this message has been