On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Michael Painter wrote:
> As randy said not too long ago, First they came for...
No. Not Randy. That was pastor martin neimoller about the nazis.
So, you just invoked godwin's law. Thread over.
thank you
suresh
On Jul 1, 2010, at 1:41 AM, Michael Painter wrote:
> As randy said not too long ago, First they came for...
The felons?
Strangely, I am not moved to defend them.
According to the article, they didn't even take the physical computers running
the sites, meaning not even other users on that virtu
As randy said not too long ago, First they came for...
BURBANK, Calif. (AP) -- U.S. officials on Wednesday announced a major crackdown on movie piracy that involved disabling
nine websites that were offering downloads of pirated movies in some cases hours after they appeared in theaters.
Offic
What kind of budget do you have? I think it really depends on what you're going
after.
Both would work... Is there something specific you want to do? Honestly, your
current bandwidth utilization and need could be handled by an OpenBSD system.
I think I may be missing your exact question. Are y
> in closing, i have to say I love HP's "alias" command, I can rev my
> config and save it to a tftp server by typing "saveit" while enabled.
> Some IOS's allow you to do a "wr net" and get it there with a predefined
> tftp server, but as we discovered, this isn't available on all devices
On 30 June 2010 21:50, Ricky Beam wrote:
> Typos are just as simple (even more simple) on an HP. There's no add/remove
> mode for vlan port membership. You specify the entire list every time.
conf t
vlan 1000
tag 1
tag 22
untag 44
exit
exit
write memory
exit
Result: vlan 1000 is tagged on port
Curious if anyone can give me some real world thoughts
on the Cisco ASR1004 w/RP2 & ESP5 versus a 7604 w/??
as a border router for web hosting environment.
I'm looking to replace a pair of aging routers of a
different make. Current config is four providers,
two send full BGP on gigE to both of ou
Hi Everyone,
Currently we are planning to doing POC for some Metro Ethernet product. Any one
has testing parameter for Metro-E product ? It's ok even the testing parameter
is basic parameter.
Thanks in advance.
Reza
Jeff Young wrote:
you'll need twice as much of Brand X and therefore, the deal isn't quite so
appealing. (By the way HP, Cisco and Juniper are pretty much
interchangeable in this discussion).
If they are interchangeable then why bother getting into a war at all?
It's very tiresome. :-|
--
> -Original Message-
> From: Greg Whynott
> Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 9:18 AM
> To: George Bonser
> Cc: Colin Alston; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Advice regarding Cisco/Juniper/HP
>
> or become familiar with some basic commands, which is after all, our
> job... on hp: show po
On 6/30/2010 5:14 PM, Greg Whynott wrote:
> On Jun 30, 2010, at 4:50 PM, Ricky Beam wrote:
>> No they don't. Which version of IOS are you running? Oh, right, that
>> switch doesn't run IOS, it runs CatOS? Wait a min, that's a 1900... it
>> uses a menu interface.
Actually, before they went
On Jun 30, 2010, at 4:50 PM, Ricky Beam wrote:
> Personally, I prefer a bit of both.
same here. both have some things which I don't agree with. prime example
again is adding more than X vlans to an interface, why the "add"?
interface TenGigabitEthernet5/5
switchport trunk allowed vlan 2
They have not claimed this. The option to change is there if LTE
becomes a better long term solution but no one has said it will happen
(or even probably).
Either way, both technologies will continue to develop and both will
be viable players in the marketplace for quite some time.
On Wed, Jun 1
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 12:18:24 -0400, Greg Whynott
wrote:
I like cisco, but i think the HP way is more logical and less prone to
error. A previous poster gave an excelent example, i burnt myself not
adding the "add" to a trunk config on our cisco switches. i went over
the magical number
On 30/06/2010 17:07, George Bonser wrote:
> Some gear you add vlans to a port. Other gear you add ports to vlans.
> Personally, I prefer the Cisco configuration syntax because if I want to
> know which vlans a port is in, you look at the port config and there it
> is. Other gear you need to look t
On Jun 30, 2010, at 12:07 PM, George Bonser wrote:
> if I want to
> know which vlans a port is in, you look at the port config and there it
> is. Other gear you need to look through each vlan configuration and
> note which vlans the port appears in and hope you don't overlook one.
or become fam
> -Original Message-
> From: sthaug
> Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 12:35 AM
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Advice regarding Cisco/Juniper/HP
>
> The Cisco default of allowing all VLANs on a trunk is dangerous in a
> service provider environment (not to mention VTP, DTP and other
> -Original Message-
> From: Colin Alston
> Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2010 11:27 PM
> To: Matthew Walster
> Cc: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Advice regarding Cisco/Juniper/HP
>
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 9:52 PM, Matthew Walster
> wrote:
> It just feels ass backwards alot of the time,
> > That's strange, I abhor the Cisco way of doing VLANs and love the
> > HP/Procurve method.
> >
> > What do you find so irritating?
>
> It just feels ass backwards alot of the time, especially trunking.
> That's more likely an "RTFM" problem, but the Cisco VLAN config has
> always just seemed mo
19 matches
Mail list logo
