On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
I can understand how a virus like Welchia can affect a flow-based
architecture like Extremes. I was under the impression that CEF enabled
Cisco gear wouldnt have this problem, but Cisco has instructions on their
webpage on how deal with it and
yo
It might be wrong place to inform, but since we might have people interested
in IRC, and using mIRC 6.x, there is an exploit found. For more info visit
link
http://www.irchelp.org/irchelp/mirc/exploit.html
Mehmet Akcin
Does anyone know anything about Bellsouth network changes, possibly
South Florida (or more areas involved?) affecting DSL? I remember they
sent out an email recently that they were making service enhancing
changes and that everyone had to add @bellsouth.net to their log-on
id's, but I haven't
This is the kicker and real question: does it require the CPU to forward
regular traffic? I believe the answer is yes, the Extreme is a flow-based
architecture and the first packet of each unique flow (however it is
defined) will need to be processed by the CPU. This is why the problems
Yes,
maybe not 100% acknowledged, but still good to know
From: 3APA3A [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 11 2003 .
Subject: Bad news on RPC DCOM vulnerability
Dear [EMAIL PROTECTED],
There are few bad news on RPC DCOM
I can understand how a virus like Welchia can affect a flow-based
architecture like Extremes. I was under the impression that CEF enabled
Cisco gear wouldnt have this problem, but Cisco has instructions on their
webpage on how deal with it and cites CPU usage as the reason. With CEF I
This is not a list issue, nor does anyone on the list care.
Please take your blathering back to IRC.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=denigrate
--
Matthew S. HallacyFUBAR, LART, BOFH Certified
http://www.poptix.net GPG public key
On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 01:18:59AM -0400, Terry Baranski wrote:
More on this -
Two of BellSouth's AS's (6197 6198) have combined to inject around
1,000 deaggregated prefixes into the global routing tables over the last
few weeks (in addition to their usual load of ~600+ for a total of
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Andy Walden wrote:
I don't know of anyone else who *routes* ICMP. Yes, ICMP packets destined
for the router, but Extreme actually CPU route all ICMP packets passing
thru.
I'm not 100% sure what your trying to say above, but all I'm refering to
is packets destined
I can understand how a virus like Welchia can affect a flow-based
architecture like Extremes. I was under the impression that CEF
enabled Cisco gear wouldnt have this problem, but Cisco has
instructions on their webpage on how deal with it and cites CPU
usage as the reason. With CEF I
Firstly, a BIG BIG thanks to all the replies.
I would like to add one comment onto this, the Black Diamonds would be used
for purely switching and nothing else.
The Junipers would do the routing, BGP tables etc...
As for as TheTollyGroup how much credibility do these guys hold?
Thanks again.
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Shazad - eServers wrote:
I would like to add one comment onto this, the Black Diamonds would be used
for purely switching and nothing else.
Then you're betting on the right horse. Get the G8Xi cards and two MSMs
per chassi and you have linerate everything.
As for as
Suresh Ramasubramanian writes on 10/12/2003 8:29 PM:
Hi there
We operate webmail services for the .name TLD (MX and DNS resolution are
handled by the nic.name people).
An update - forwarding a post to bind-announce
From: Peter Losher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Organization: ISC
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
see http://sa.vix.com/~vixie/comnetsurv/
this is not an icann thing btw, it's just me.
Matt,
Yes we are that is correct.
We will be offering COLO and dedicated hosting and need some serious
horse-power.
Right now, we are set on this..,.
ROUTER : 2 * Juniper M40's, these will be connected from day one to
darkfibre.
DISTRID : 2 * Extreme BlackDiamonds with redundant routing
Shawn,
London, UK.
Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any more questions.
Best Regards,
Shazad
eServers - driving the e into your business.
-Original Message-
From: Fisher, Shawn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 October 2003 15:54
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Paul Vixie wrote:
see http://sa.vix.com/~vixie/comnetsurv/
this is not an icann thing btw, it's just me.
An incentive to take the survey: If you fill it out, it'll tell you the
aggregated results so far, which are, lemme tell you, pretty surprising.
Who knew
see http://sa.vix.com/~vixie/comnetsurv/
An incentive to take the survey: If you fill it out, it'll tell you the
aggregated results so far, which are, lemme tell you, pretty surprising.
Who knew that NANOG subscribers would anonymously admit they were
clueless? :-)
that's just bad
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Shazad - eServers wrote:
AGGREG : These would be a mix of Extreme Alpines/BigIron4000 - 8000/Summit
48i's depending on whether we are offering colo, ded-hosting, managed
services etc...
ACCESS : Extreme Summit 24e3 or Foundry series.
I recommend you to stay away from
You know what, go and fuck yourself you little whore..
Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any more questions.
Best Regards,
Shazad
eServers - driving the e into your business.
-Original Message-
From: Randy Bush [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 13 October 2003
Mikael,
The 24e3 would be used for dedicated-servers only, for colocation/trasnit
selling we will be using the Summit 48I.
Thanks
Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any more questions.
Best Regards,
Shazad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL
Hey all,
I apologize for posting this here, especially for what is essentially an
end-user broadband issue, but I'm looking at what appears to be a link a
few hops upstream from me that has been flapping frequently and I can't
get our provider to look into it.
I am located in Madison, WI, and I
My apologies, There was no need for him to go around calling me a dumb
f***.
I apologies, I didn't realise I had posted his message onto the nanog
mailing list..
Sorry.
Regards,
Shazad
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Shazad -
At 16:39 13/10/2003, you wrote:
M apologies, There was no need for him to go around calling me a dumb
f***. I apologies, I didn't realise I had posted his message onto the nanog
mailing list..
Marketroids using public mailing lists for sales leads should learn list
etiquette and reply etiquette
I am located in Madison, WI, and I have my mail/server machine geek.net
co-located in Minneapolis on a business-class DSL line (1.5m/384k). For
the past couple of months, I'll lose connectivity for about 5 minutes
several times a day.
snip
Any thoughts or recommendations here?
RFO:
You know what, go and fuck yourself you little whore..
Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any more questions.
Best Regards,
Shazad
eServers - driving the e into your business.
This is the second time recently that a member of
this list has dragged their own personal disputes
If the shoe fits...
-alex
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Shazad - eServers wrote:
My apologies, There was no need for him to go around calling me a dumb
f***.
I apologies, I didn't realise I had posted his message onto the nanog
mailing list..
Sorry.
Regards,
Shazad
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 04:39:09PM +0100, Shazad - eServers wrote:
My apologies, There was no need for him to go around calling me a dumb
f***.
I apologies, I didn't realise I had posted his message onto the nanog
mailing list..
If the shoe fits...
Is it just me, or could nanog really
Joel,
If you think this was a sales lead, then you are wrong.
I admit, I have not really used mailing list before and accidentally CC
nanog on the first correspondence, but for him to email me back calling
xxx (you already know) was not on.
I replied back to his email and DID NOT CC
On Sun, 12 Oct 2003, Andy Walden wrote:
Actually, as far as I know, all switches and routers use the CPU to
process ICMP. It is a control protocol and the safest option is to
ensure the vendor has implemented some sort of CPU rate-limiting so it
can't be overwhelmed.
Redbacks SmartEdge 800
Matthew S. Hallacy wrote:
This is not a list issue, nor does anyone on the list care.
Put me down as caring. Moreover, as a long-time participant in this
forum, I'm particularly concerned about even anecdotal evidence that
one of our posters is mounting an attack on another.
Please
Don't mean to get off-topic... but speaking the Extremes..
Has anyone here had luck with doing some BGP stuff with Sumit 48i?
Thanks,
-hc
--
Haesu C.
TowardEX Technologies, Inc.
Consulting, colocation, web hosting, network design and implementation
http://www.towardex.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi, have you tried the return path traceroute... Like, run traceroute _From_ the
server behind dsl and back to you? Having traceroutes done either way may be helpful
often times b/c sometimes problems do rise on asymetric routing situation where
provider is doing bgp with x no. of providers.
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 11:48:39 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
RFO: Colocation with people who have business class DSL connectivity.
Notice that although doing that sort of colo is often frowned upon, the DSL
isn't the issue here. His direct provider is being responsive, but THEIR upstream
is
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
Is it just me, or could nanog really benefit from being moderated, or at
least nanog-post being access controlled? God knows why I've kept skimming
it even after the majority of actual clueful network operators have long
Are you volunteering
Based on the web pages at http://2mbit.com/ and http://www.sosdg.org/,
I see an effort to improve the community not found at either
http://www.poptix.net nor http://techmonkeys.org/.
I didn't draw that conclusion at all. Much the opposite, judging from
their photo gallery, they seem like
This is the second time recently that a member of
this list has dragged their own personal disputes
onto the list. I don't particularly like this
and I would be happy to see the list owner come
down hard on the perp. Banishment?
You should make sure you know who the perp is before making
I agree with you, Bouncing private messages onto the forum with a purpose of
making me look bad is really SAD.
I did it accidentally BUT quoted him, he literally bounced my message as If
I had sent it to NANOG.
Check your headers and you will find out, I never sent that message to
NANOG.
Maybe
Subject: Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Date: Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 12:19:20PM -0400 Quoting
Haesu ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Don't mean to get off-topic... but speaking the Extremes..
Has anyone here had luck with doing some BGP stuff with Sumit 48i?
Not beyond lab setups, but yes, they speak BGP. We
Doh! silly me... I didn't read the whole email in the first time.. Sorry about useless
post :(
-hc
--
Haesu C.
TowardEX Technologies, Inc.
Consulting, colocation, web hosting, network design and implementation
http://www.towardex.com | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cell: (978)394-2867 | Office:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Haesu wrote:
Don't mean to get off-topic... but speaking the Extremes..
Has anyone here had luck with doing some BGP stuff with Sumit 48i?
Yes. The only thing I miss in their implementation is the equivalent of
neighbor ip default-originate.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson
From here, [EMAIL PROTECTED] looks like a relatively small colo
customer.
Yes we are relatively small, we colocate around 1500 servers in our own
suite.
What's he looking at big switches for?
Quite frankly I can look for what I want, we are expanding into Europe and
came here for some
I've seen a similar issue with a carrier in Boston, also within Level3. You
can give them a call, although I am sure someone will object, I have never
had a problem with them being helpful, even for a non customer.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Hello Everyone,
Social Events are as follows:
Saturday Night:
House of Blues for a concert featuring Soulive with Me'Shell Ndegeocello
http://www.hob.com/tickets/eventdetail.asp?eventid=22654
The doors open at 7:30, so we'll meet in the Hotel Lobby at 6:30pm and
either cab or walk over
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 12:15:02PM -0400, William Allen Simpson wrote:
Put me down as caring. Moreover, as a long-time participant in this
forum, I'm particularly concerned about even anecdotal evidence that
one of our posters is mounting an attack on another.
For clarification, no, I
Why do we even have this pissing match going on in NANOG? Take it off line.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Booth, Michael (ENG)
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 7:18 AM
To: William Allen Simpson
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Based on the web
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Mans Nilsson wrote:
Subject: Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Date: Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 12:19:20PM -0400
Quoting Haesu ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Don't mean to get off-topic... but speaking the Extremes..
Has anyone here had luck with doing some BGP stuff with Sumit 48i?
Not
- Original Message -
From: Booth, Michael (ENG) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: William Allen Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 7:18 AM
Subject: Re: abuse from a user of this list
I didn't draw that conclusion at all. Much the opposite, judging from
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 05:52:59PM +0100, Shazad - eServers wrote:
If you are so smart, GO and CHECK the HEADERS of that POST. Was it me? NO IT
WASENT.
No offense, but:
Received: by segue.merit.edu (Postfix)
Booth, Michael (ENG) wrote:
Based on the web pages at http://2mbit.com/ and http://www.sosdg.org/,
I see an effort to improve the community not found at either
http://www.poptix.net nor http://techmonkeys.org/.
I didn't draw that conclusion at all. Much the opposite, judging from
Now, I _do_ take offense to being called a script kiddie. I've been doing
development for more then 7 years in various projects under various aliases.
What aliases?
Unless the aliases you've used include vixie and rbush, I think this
is testament to your being a script kiddie, concealing
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Pekka Savola wrote:
Just don't use extremes as routers, and you will be much, much happier. It
_might_ work in the dumbest, unicast-only setups, but I have a lot of
doubts about anything more complex than that.
I think you're being too pessimistic. For instance, some of
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Paul Vixie wrote:
see http://sa.vix.com/~vixie/comnetsurv/
this is not an icann thing btw, it's just me.
OK, this is nit-picky, but the errors a wildcard will pick up are NOT 404
errors. A wild card could not possibly ever pick up a 404 error. Since 404
is a server error
Shazad wrote:
I did it accidentally BUT quoted him, he literally bounced my
message as If I had sent it to NANOG. Check your headers and
you will find out, I never sent that message to NANOG.
Indeed. Although you did screw up by quoting his first private message,
it does appear to me like
Hi, NANOGers.
] Next topic: multiple origin ASNs ..
Ooo, one of our faves. :) For a simple view:
http://www.cymru.com/BGP/incon01.html
http://www.cymru.com/BGP/incon01-list.html
Thanks,
Rob, for Team Cymru.
--
Rob Thomas
http://www.cymru.com
ASSERT(coffee != empty);
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, GSRs are better at routing but they lack L2 capability and it's
a
very expensive (and lousy unless you have Engine3 cards) GE
plattform.
Steinar Haug
On the other hand, 6500s can do both L2 and L3 rather well, including
BGP.
Aren't most of the 6500 blades
On the other hand, 6500s can do both L2 and L3 rather well, including
BGP.
Aren't most of the 6500 blades the same as the 7600 ones anyway? Between
these two IMHO we are looking at a blurry distinction between a router
with very good switching capabilities and a L3 switch with very good
[substitutions for offensive terms are mine]
You know what, go and [run windows] yourself you little [manager]..
Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any more questions.
Best Regards,
Shazad
eServers - driving the e into your business.
This is the second time
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matthew S. Hallacy
Sent: October 13, 2003 1:21 PM
To: Shazad - eServers; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Extreme BlackDiamond
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 05:52:59PM +0100, Shazad - eServers wrote:
On Sat, 2003-10-11 at 10:30, Bill Manning wrote:
bing! the 3ffe:: entries are for experimental services -only-
while the 2001:: will eventually be production services.
and the test are -not- primarly about connectivity.
Last time I checked on this 3ffe:: was not tagged as
Rob Thomas wrote:
Hi, NANOGers.
] Next topic: multiple origin ASNs ..
Ooo, one of our faves. :) For a simple view:
http://www.cymru.com/BGP/incon01.html
http://www.cymru.com/BGP/incon01-list.html
Thanks,
Rob, for Team Cymru.
Thanks Rob. Noticed one of our routes there that an upstream
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Michel Py wrote:
Aren't most of the 6500 blades the same as the 7600 ones anyway? Between
these two IMHO we are looking at a blurry distinction between a router
with very good switching capabilities and a L3 switch with very good
routing capabilities.
Does the 7600 have
On Mon Oct 13, 2003 at 01:19:21PM -0700, Tom (UnitedLayer) wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Michel Py wrote:
Aren't most of the 6500 blades the same as the 7600 ones anyway? Between
these two IMHO we are looking at a blurry distinction between a router
with very good switching capabilities
7600 is also vertical boards whereas the 6500 is horizontal.
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Simon Lockhart wrote:
On Mon Oct 13, 2003 at 01:19:21PM -0700, Tom (UnitedLayer) wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Michel Py wrote:
Aren't most of the 6500 blades the same as the 7600 ones anyway? Between
7600 is also vertical boards whereas the 6500 is horizontal.
Yep, I think from now on, we should make this a primary distinction
between switch and a router: If a device has vertical line cards, it is a
router, if horizontal, it is a switch.
Works well for 7500/12000/5x00/6500. ;)
-alex
6500-NEBS has also vertical boards ...
Arnold
On Monday, October 13, 2003 10:37 PM, Robert A. Hayden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
7600 is also vertical boards whereas the 6500 is horizontal.
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Simon Lockhart wrote:
On Mon Oct 13, 2003 at 01:19:21PM -0700, Tom (UnitedLayer)
At 04:43 PM 10/13/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
7600 is also vertical boards whereas the 6500 is horizontal.
Yep, I think from now on, we should make this a primary distinction
between switch and a router: If a device has vertical line cards, it is a
router, if horizontal, it is a switch.
Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
I've seen this in the press repeatedly and it drives me almost as nuts as
having to call DSL access hardware a modem.
Your DSL access hardware would not be a too good DSL access hardware
without a modem so I suggest you consider putting some money aside for
Christopher X. Candreva wrote:
I've seen this in the press repeatedly and it drives me almost as nuts as
having to call DSL access hardware a modem.
What's wrong with calling it a modem? It MOdulates and DEModulates
between a digital bitstream and an analog signal.
Bradley
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Simon Lockhart wrote:
I've still yet to see anything that suggests that the difference
between the 7600 and the 6500 is more than just a paint job and a
marketting job.
On Monday, October 13, 2003 10:37 PM, Robert A. Hayden
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
7600 is also
A small problem... all of my 7200s have horizontal line cards as do the
Juniper M5/7/10/20. The smaller 7100, 3700, 3600, 2600 also have
horizontal line cards too. So... here is a correction.
From now on, we should make this a primary distinction between switch
and a router: If a device
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't understand how you can differentiate between a router and an L3
switch. In my view L3 switch is a marketing term. All high end boxes
do hardware based IP forwarding, whether their ancestry is from the L2
or the L3 side.
To me something
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Simon Lockhart wrote:
Does the 7600 have the same BGP Scanner problem as the 6509 does?
I've still yet to see anything that suggests that the difference between
the 7600 and the 6500 is more than just a paint job and a marketting job.
Whee! Even more of a reason not to
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe you could expand on the BGP scanner problems - we haven't seen
them all the time we've been running 6500 native with full routes (about
1.5 years now).
BGP Scanner taking up close to 100% of CPU on a box periodically.
GSR doesn't seem to do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
William Caban [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2003-10-11 at 10:30, Bill Manning wrote:
bing! the 3ffe:: entries are for experimental services -only-
while the 2001:: will eventually be production services.
and the test are -not-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robert Boyle wrote:
|
| At 04:43 PM 10/13/2003, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|
| 7600 is also vertical boards whereas the 6500 is horizontal.
|
| Yep, I think from now on, we should make this a primary distinction
| between switch and a router: If a
That suggests that it's an ASL (Analog Subscriber Line)...
Pete Templin
Senior Staff Engineer
TexLink Communications
(210) 892-4183
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: Bradley Dunn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 4:05 PM
To: Christopher X. Candreva;
On Sat, 2003-10-11 at 10:30, Bill Manning wrote:
bing! the 3ffe:: entries are for experimental services -only-
while the 2001:: will eventually be production services.
and the test are -not- primarly about connectivity.
Last time I checked on this 3ffe:: was not tagged
75xx/GSR, dCEF? 75xx/GSR are L3 switches then. ;) Not to add
flame-bait, but..
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/switch_c/xcprt2/xcdcef.htm
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't understand how you can
Tom (UnitedLayer) wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe you could expand on the BGP scanner problems - we haven't seen
them all the time we've been running 6500 native with full routes (about
1.5 years now).
BGP Scanner taking up close to 100% of CPU on a box
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 11:10:32PM +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't understand how you can differentiate between a router and an L3
switch. In my view L3 switch is a marketing term. All high end boxes
do hardware based IP forwarding,
which way is up? perhaps you had better state the
problem in terms of X,Y,Z coordinates at a minium.
Adding the fourth vector, time, may be useful as well;
e.g. ... it was a router last night...
Easy: horizontal is same direction as 19 mounting brackets ;)
I've yet
| Yep, I think from now on, we should make this a primary distinction
| between switch and a router: If a device has vertical line cards, it is a
| router, if horizontal, it is a switch.
|
| A small problem... all of my 7200s have horizontal line cards as do the
| Juniper M5/7/10/20. The
On Mon, Oct 13, 2003 at 02:15:59PM -0700, Tom (UnitedLayer) wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe you could expand on the BGP scanner problems - we haven't seen
them all the time we've been running 6500 native with full routes (about
1.5 years now).
BGP Scanner
bgp scanner cpu usage == number of neighbors * number of routes in table
lots of neighbors would cause this, for longer periods. If running
SUP1A/MSFC this could be worse than with MSFC2 (slightly more CPU
power), and much worse than SUP2 I'm guessing.
Tom (UnitedLayer) wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct
Here are some interesting tidbits found recently...
The US DoD will be using a Juniper M7i for their ipv6 testbed:
https://spot.hpcmo.hpc.mil/hpc/docs/Htdocs/DOC-MIL/DREN/CONFERENCE/2003/2003_ron_broersma_ipv6_pilot.ppt
Mention of the M7i and M10i in this document:
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 16:17:14 -0500
From: Pete Templin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
That suggests that it's an ASL (Analog Subscriber Line)...
When the signal is placed on the wire, it is very analog. the digital
signal is modulated onto the wire and demodulated off of
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Steve Francis wrote:
Doesn't happen here with MSFC2/SupII.
Maybe just MSFC1's that are subject to that.
That is possible, but I didn't see it on a 7500 till I started taking more
than 1 full table.
Robert Boyle wrote:
From now on, we should make this a primary distinction between
switch and a router: If a device has vertical line cards, it is
a router, if horizontal, it is a switch, unless there are two
or more vertical slots within any horizontal slot plane, then
it is, in fact, a
| From now on, we should make this a primary distinction between switch
| and a router: If a device has vertical line cards, it is a router, if
| horizontal, it is a switch, unless there are two or more vertical slots
| within any horizontal slot plane, then it is, in fact, a router.
|
Not to mention that apparently if you turn off route-caching completely,
you will make a router out of any l3 switch (since all packet forwarding
will equally slow)
-alex
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Jason LeBlanc wrote:
75xx/GSR, dCEF? 75xx/GSR are L3 switches then. ;) Not to add
flame-bait,
Steve Francis wrote:
BGP Scanner taking up close to 100% of CPU on a box periodically.
GSR doesn't seem to do it, but a buncha other cisco boxes do.
Its more irritating than anything else, especially when customers
complain
that when they traceroute they see ~200ms latency to the router...
Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
So a 7500 with a fast cache is a L3 switch? :)
Of course. It does wire-speed switching with one and
Possibly more CX-EIP6 if you enable dCEF :-)
Michel.
At 06:03 PM 10/13/2003, you wrote:
From the PDF, regarding DREN implemention of ipv6:
No great incentive for DREN sites to implement IPv6
no near term win
additional effort and complexity, generally not funded
Can't deploy in a safe and secure manner
Existing DREN intrusion detection (IDS)
Robert Boyle wrote (on Oct 14):
The M7i is supposed to compete with the Cisco 7100/7200. It is designed as
a provider managed CPE for DS3 and OC3 level customers. At least that is
the niche they are targeting. It will come in two flavors - integrated dual
port 100Base-T or single GigE. It
Yup,
Looks like they've started getting things a bit organized since sunday night/
monday early dawn. From my network's pt of view, you can see the sudden slight
sink in announcements transited thru UUNET which is where bellsouth's prefixes
come from on my end:
96 matches
Mail list logo
