- NANOG - lists.nanog.org

<Help with Content Switching Module for 6500>
by Michael Ruiz 13 Jan '11

13 Jan '11

Hello all, I am having very unusual problem with the CSM. This is what my problems. I have my active CSM setup for a Fault Tolerance group with a priority of 100 and an alternate of 30 and set to preempt. Now for some reason I cannot get the standby configure to get the configuration from the Active. I did a debug and it appears the CSM on the standby is deleting it's configuration and the active fails to sends its configuration. So I know the Active is talking across the VLAN I have created for this purpose. I can see the information coming up on my debug from both ends. Below is my configuration. Any help on this is appreciated. Thank you in advance. DR01.SNATXDC1# show module csm 8 ft detail FT group 2, vlan 45 This box is active Configuration is out-of-sync priority 100, heartbeat 1, failover 3, preemption is on alternate priority 30 total buffer count 6214, illegal state transitions 0 receive buffers not committed 0, send buffers not committed 0 updates: sent 4, received 0, committed 0 coup msgs: sent 0, received 0 election msgs: sent 0, received 2 heartbeat msgs: sent 1057, received 594 relinquish msgs: sent 0, received 0 conn replicate msgs: sent 462, received 0 conn refresh msgs: sent 462, received 0 conn reset msgs: sent 61, received 0 conn redundancy errors: msgs lost 0, msgs rejected 0 packets: total received 0, total dropped 0, duplicates 0 checksum failed 0, dumped 0, buffer unavailable 0 number of state updates in last 8 transfers: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Critical device and interface tracking: DR01.SNATXDC1# DR02.SNATXDC1#show module csm 8 ft detail FT group 2, vlan 45 This box is in standby state Configuration is out-of-sync priority 10, heartbeat 1, failover 3, preemption is off total buffer count 6214, illegal state transitions 10 receive buffers not committed 0, send buffers not committed 0 updates: sent 4, received 0, committed 0 coup msgs: sent 0, received 0 election msgs: sent 2, received 0 heartbeat msgs: sent 0, received 984 relinquish msgs: sent 0, received 0 conn replicate msgs: sent 0, received 0 conn refresh msgs: sent 0, received 0 conn reset msgs: sent 0, received 0 conn redundancy errors: msgs lost 0, msgs rejected 0 packets: total received 5056012, total dropped 0, duplicates 0 checksum failed 0, dumped 0, buffer unavailable 0 number of state updates in last 8 transfers: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Critical device and interface tracking: DR02.SNATXDC1# ! ft group 2 vlan 45 priority 100 alt 30 preempt DR02.SNATXDC1#show run module 8 Building configuration... Current configuration : 5 bytes end DR02.SNATXDC1#???? M.A.R

1 0

Re: Routing Suggestions
by james＠jamesstewartsmith.com 13 Jan '11

13 Jan '11

Since it sounds like there is no alternate path, it sounds like the most secure, simplest to operate would be static routes. It's not sexy, but no need to toss in a routing protocol if it's such a static setup. ------Original Message------ From: Lars Carter To: NANOG(a)NANOG.org Subject: Routing Suggestions Sent: Jan 12, 2011 7:13 PM Hi NANOG list, I have a simple, hypothetical question regarding preferred connectivity methods for you guys that I would like to get the hive mind opinion about. There are two companies, Company A and Company B, that are planning to continuously exchange a large amount of sensitive data and are located in a mutual datacenter. They decide to order a cross connect and peer privately for the obvious reasons. Company A has a small but knowledgable engineering staff and it's network is running BGP as its only routing protocol with multiple transit vendors and a handful of other larger peers. Company B is a smaller shop that is single homed behind one ISP through a default static route, they have hardware that can handle advanced routing protocols but have not had the need to implement them as of yet. There is a single prefix on both sides that will need to be routed to the other party. It is rare that prefixes would need to change or for additional prefixes to be added. >From an technical, operational, and security standpoint what would be the preferred way to route traffic between these two networks? Cheers, Lars Sent from my “contract free” BlackBerry® smartphone on the WIND network.

1 0

BT Support#
by Natarajan Balasubramanian 12 Jan '11

12 Jan '11

Hi, I am looking for the Enterprise (24x7) technical support contact# for British Telecom (BT), services provided in USA. Thanks & Regards, Natarajan Balasubramanian

1 0

TeliaSonera US contact?
by George Bonser 12 Jan '11

12 Jan '11

Does anyone have a (preferably sales) contact with TeliaSonera in the US? I have been trying to get someone to speak to me about a product of theirs (have exchanged email but can't get them on the phone). It might be the time difference with Europe making things difficult so I am wondering if someone might have a contact in North America. Thanks. G

2 2

Fw: Cisco Sanitization
by Greg Whynott 12 Jan '11

12 Jan '11

V ----- Original Message ----- From: Greg Whynott Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 09:46 AM To: 'Timothy.Green(a)ManTech.com' <Timothy.Green(a)ManTech.com> Subject: Re: Cisco Sanitization Replace the flash cards. If you are really concerned about information being disclosed, formatting/deleting files will not destroy the data and it probably can be recovered. Or take the flash cards and scrub them from a pc. G ----- Original Message ----- From: Green, Timothy [mailto:Timothy.Green@ManTech.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 09:41 AM To: nanog(a)nanog.org <nanog(a)nanog.org> Subject: Cisco Sanitization Hey all! I'm currently creating a sanitization guide for all my hardware. When I got to my Cisco devices I noticed there are numerous ways to reset them back to the default and clear the NVRAM. Does anyone have a guide that includes sanitization information for all Cisco devices(at least switches, routers, IDS's, and ASA 5500 Series) so I don't have to recreate the wheel? Thanks, Tim -- This message and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by anyone other than the person for whom it was originally intended is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. Opinions, conclusions or other information contained in this message may not be that of the organization.

2 1

Cisco Sanitization
by Green, Timothy 12 Jan '11

12 Jan '11

Hey all! I'm currently creating a sanitization guide for all my hardware. When I got to my Cisco devices I noticed there are numerous ways to reset them back to the default and clear the NVRAM. Does anyone have a guide that includes sanitization information for all Cisco devices(at least switches, routers, IDS's, and ASA 5500 Series) so I don't have to recreate the wheel? Thanks, Tim

2 1

Agenda for Miami
by Schiller, Heather A 11 Jan '11

11 Jan '11

Hopefully posted soonish? Less than 3 weeks to the meeting, the early registration window has passed and there is still no agenda. Thanks, --h ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Heather Schiller Network Security - Verizon Business 1.800.900.0241 security(a)verizonbusiness.com

2 1

Re: AltDB?
by Jon Lewis 11 Jan '11

11 Jan '11

[moved to nanog as it seems a far more appropriate forum than cisco-nsp] On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, Jose Madrid wrote: > Anyone here use AltDB? It seems their servers have been down for two days. > I have emailed their admin alias but have gotten nothing. Anyone? > > whois -h whois.altdb.net 199.48.252.0 > [Querying whois.altdb.net] > [Unable to connect to remote host] Can anyone from Level3 say how this will impact customer BGP filters. Will L3 keep working with the last data sync they got from altdb? I'm guessing if whatever the problem is with altdb isn't fixed soon, those who use it as their IRR will need to re-publish all their objects in another IRR DB and have any transit providers who build filters based on IRR data update their profiles to use object data from the IRR DB to which they moved their records. I'd been thinking about moving from altdb to ARIN's but hadn't had sufficient motivation. www.altdb.net is reachable, but the whois server is not. Even altdb queries run from http://www.altdb.net/ fail. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________

16 36

NIST IPv6 document
by Kevin Oberman 11 Jan '11

11 Jan '11

NIST has released SP800-119, "Guidelines for the Secure Deployment of IPv6". While I don't agree with everything in it, it is an excellent overview of IPv6, differences from IPv4, and security advice. While the title sounds like a security document, the security implications are only a part of it. I've not finished reading it, but my first reaction is that this is a good source of information. Well written, fairly detailed (at 188 pages) with lots of references. The PDF is available at: http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-119/sp800-119.pdf -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: oberman(a)es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634 Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4 EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751

33 129

Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?
by Brandon Kim 11 Jan '11

11 Jan '11

Hello gents: I wanted to put this out there for all of you. Our network consists of a mixture of Cisco and Extreme equipment. Would you say that it's fair to say that if you are serious at all about being a service provider that your core equipment is Cisco based? Am I limiting myself by thinking that Cisco is the "de facto" vendor of choice? I'm not looking for so much "fanboy" responses, but more of a real world experience of what you guys use that actually work and does the job..... No technical questions here, just general feedback. I try to follow the Tolly Group who compares products, and they continually show that Cisco equipment is a poor performer in almost any equipment compared to others, I find that so hard to believe..... Thanks! Brandon

24 44