- Original Message -
From: "Ivan Groenewald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Applying patches to binaries, hm. Sounds a bit difficult.
It's actually quite simple, you do a compare between the old binary and the
new and the patch contains only the differences. It's a very effective way
to do p
- Original Message -
From: "Owen DeLong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Whether 90% of the world uses it or not, the point is that the problem
is your software doesn't comply with the established standards. Why should
everyone who has software that complies be incumbered with the limitations
of
C. Jon Larsen wrote:
It was supposed to be a complete ground up re-write in an OO language
and it would have the ability to link new modules or shared objects in
at run time, and it would unify the existing router (25xx / 4[57]xx /
75xx) family with the Grand Junction acquisition - the CAT
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ivan Groenewald wrote:
> ..
> and Cisco can distribute them via BitTorrent :-)
> That's equivalent to saying the internet is safe enough to do your
> corporate banking via plain text email.
> my 2 pence,
Actually BitTorrent is a very good technology
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Tony Li wrote:
> True, but you ARE suggesting that Cisco produce a binary patch, to a
> possibly compressed image.
Like I said, it isn't trivial. For example, the patching software (this
would require memory) could uncompress the image, patch it and
That's why we have Juniper Router in the market.
I guess somebody who wants to use *BSD kernel for baseline of Router
Operating system moves to setup new company, and it became Juniper.
Juniper JuNOS uses FreeBSD as kernel.
Hyun
C. Jon Larsen wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005, Jim McBurnett wr
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005, Jim McBurnett wrote:
If I remember correctly, This Exactly where Cisco has said they are
going...
With the IOS XR Just as the beginning..
Does anyone else remember this?
On a different, older tangent ... coming from my possibly (probably)
flawed memories:
A looong
Roy Badami wrote:
Geo> Gee, it must be nice to be in the top 10% of the smart
Geo> people. Why don't you suggest Valdis aim for the top 5% and
Geo> figure out how Mr. Jeffrey I. Schiller manages to post using
Geo> debian PGP signed messages that don't appear as attachments?
Havi
Hi Jim,
If I remember correctly there was some press hype about the idea of
modularising IOS just about a year ago, which inevitably culminated IOS
XR for carrier products. iirc there wasn't any talk of backports or
deployments for non carrier equipment. ( I stand to be corrected of course )
QUOTE
From: Ivan Groenewald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
IMHO IOS should be completely modular. ie SNMP/QOS/BGP etc should be a
loadable module etc. In the event of you patching a service specific
bug, you'd only upload the new modules and insmod them. I'd be very
happy if the Cisco router fairy w
Applying patches to binaries, hm. Sounds a bit difficult.
IMHO IOS should be completely modular. ie SNMP/QOS/BGP etc should be a loadable
module etc. In the event of you patching a service specific bug, you'd only
upload the new modules and insmod them. I'd be very happy if the Cisco route
At 5:33 PM -0400 2005-07-30, Geo. wrote:
Gee, it must be nice to be in the top 10% of the smart people. Why don't you
suggest Valdis aim for the top 5% and figure out how Mr. Jeffrey I. Schiller
manages to post using debian PGP signed messages that don't appear as
attachments?
The fact t
Geo> Gee, it must be nice to be in the top 10% of the smart
Geo> people. Why don't you suggest Valdis aim for the top 5% and
Geo> figure out how Mr. Jeffrey I. Schiller manages to post using
Geo> debian PGP signed messages that don't appear as attachments?
Having just taken a quic
> Just because 90% of the people in the world are stupid, does that
> mean that we all have to be stupid as well? If nine out of ten
> people jumped off a bridge, should the other guy be forced to do the
> same?
Gee, it must be nice to be in the top 10% of the smart people. Why don't you
suggest
At 3:58 PM -0400 2005-07-30, Geo. wrote:
Yeah yeah, I've had this discussion several times, it's a bug in my software
and you couldn't give a darn if you are doing something that is incompatible
with what 90% of the world uses for email because you are right and everyone
else is wrong.
J
> This isn't trivial to do, but it isn't rocket science either!
True, but you ARE suggesting that Cisco produce a binary patch, to a
possibly compressed image.
I think you should really think long and hard before you conclude that
you really want that. IMHO, the risk/reward ratio as compared t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Folks.
All that is needed is for cisco to put an "upgrade" command into their
router. The "upgrade" command determines the routers version (and
current patch level) and requests the download of a version specific
patch file.
The command takes as arg
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Your original suggestion was that it push it to the router.<<
Ok I guess it could be read that way but I was more suggesting they look for
a way to patch not upgrade to a new version. I've been around the industry
long enough to have seen
--On Saturday, July 30, 2005 14:43 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 10:28:38 EDT, "Geo." said:
available for free like the patches need to be. So I suggest they employ
a different patch method, you download an exe from their ftp site, it
takes your current build which is st
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 10:28:38 EDT, "Geo." said:
> available for free like the patches need to be. So I suggest they employ a
> different patch method, you download an exe from their ftp site, it takes
> your current build which is stored on your computer, patches it, and uploads
> it to your router
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>The ability to connect to the router and push a software change? Let's
think
this through a bit, shall we? ;)<<
Who said push? I said cisco's whole patch method is to move people to a new
version of IOS instead of patching the old version
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 00:48:13 EDT, "Geo." said:
> What ongoing support, just put the fixes on an ftp site. Cisco's problem is
> they aren't patches, they are full versions. If they created an exe file
> that attached via tcp/ip to the router and just changed the bits that needed
The ability to con
> Sorry, but its a traditional part of the product model for
> telecommunications equipment. PBX's, routers, pretty much everything -
> support contract required. Sure, you could have it a different way, but
you
> would have to be willing to pay significantly more up front to pay for
that
> ongoin
On Fri, 29 Jul 2005, Fergie (Paul Ferguson) wrote:
>
> Hey, Dan...
>
> What's that they say abou 800 lb. Gorillas...
>
> :-)
>
> - ferg
>
> -- Daniel Golding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Cisco's conduct in this case may or may not be improper - we'll have to wait
> for a little more infor
Hey, Dan...
What's that they say abou 800 lb. Gorillas...
:-)
- ferg
-- Daniel Golding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Cisco's conduct in this case may or may not be improper - we'll have to wait
for a little more information. From a PR point of view, they probably should
have let things ride and
On 7/28/05 4:51 PM, "Geo." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> No, the point is if you want the internet to be patched then you can't
> torture people when they come to you for the patches.
>
> Cisco routers are being sold to every company who connects to the internet,
> it's one step up from consum
On 7/28/05 4:29 PM, "Christopher L. Morrow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Geo. wrote:
>
>>
>> Jared,
>>
>> Have you ever actually tried to get the updates using this method? It really
>> does take the better part of a week and no less than half a dozen emails or
>>
In a message written on Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 04:51:18PM -0400, Geo. wrote:
> Cisco routers are being sold to every company who connects to the internet,
> it's one step up from consumer products. You can't expect every company who
> owns a cisco router to buy an expensive contract or be willing to
No, the point is if you want the internet to be patched then you can't
torture people when they come to you for the patches.
Cisco routers are being sold to every company who connects to the internet,
it's one step up from consumer products. You can't expect every company who
owns a cisco router
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Geo. wrote:
>
> Jared,
>
> Have you ever actually tried to get the updates using this method? It really
> does take the better part of a week and no less than half a dozen emails or
> phone calls and then there is the begging...
if it's critical to your business you'd thin
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Geo. wrote:
> Have you ever actually tried to get the updates using this method? It really
> does take the better part of a week and no less than half a dozen emails or
> phone calls and then there is the begging...
I have, on at least two occasions I remember, and I don't r
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 03:46:41PM -0400, Geo. wrote:
>
> Jared,
>
> Have you ever actually tried to get the updates using this method? It really
> does take the better part of a week and no less than half a dozen emails or
> phone calls and then there is the begging...
The point is you
Re: Cisco and the tobacco industry
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Florian Weimer wrote:
> But it looks as if Cisco actually did this, and you (and Geo) just
> weren't part of the elite circle of operators whose networks are
> considered U.S. national critical infrastructure.
Did they a
Jared,
Have you ever actually tried to get the updates using this method? It really
does take the better part of a week and no less than half a dozen emails or
phone calls and then there is the begging...
Geo.
George Roettger
Netlink Services
> Cisco always has provided free upgrades to
* J. Oquendo:
> Maybe it is time an authority figure steps in and makes some form of rules
> for vendors to distribute fixes under some form of law. If this flaw of
> Cisco's could lead to the kind of severe damage as Mr. Lynn claims,
> shouldn't it fall on the shoulders of Cisco to get their act
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 02:17:46PM -0400, J. Oquendo wrote:
>
>
> Subject : RE: Cisco IOS Exploit Cover Up
>
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Geo. wrote:
>
> > I think there is also a LOT concern about all the unpatched routers that
> > remain unpatched simply because the admins don't feel like spending
36 matches
Mail list logo
