March 1998 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Q: IP Space Management Software
by Andrew Brown 12 Mar '98

12 Mar '98

NetID by Bay Networks is by far the best IP address managment package on the market. I personally reviewed each package - Accugraph, TGV/Cisco, QIP and NetID NetID is the most intuitive for VLSM allocation and DNS management see Bay's web site Andrew -----Original Message----- From: Brantley Jones <bjones(a)cte.net> To: nanog(a)merit.edu <nanog(a)merit.edu> Date: Thursday, March 12, 1998 4:34 PM Subject: Re: Q: IP Space Management Software >At 03:16 PM 3/12/98 -0500, you wrote: >> >>Are any of you using software that you would recommend for large-scale >>management of IP space across AS', subnets from /16 to /32, >>differentiating IP blocks from IP hosts? >> >>Would love to hear from you if you do! >> >>Mike. > >Excel !...hehe, I would (obviously) also love to hear if somebody is using >something better, that is commercially available. I would worry about the >program's ability to handle VLSM. > >Brantley > > > >

1 0

Re: Q: IP Space Management Software
by Dean Holland 12 Mar '98

12 Mar '98

At Bellsouth.net we are using a product from Quadritek called QIP. It's very good. Contact our Lead Engineer (Ron Muir) at 770.522.6363 for details on a users point of view;or see Quadritek home page http://www.quadritek.com. Dean Holland ---------- > From: Brantley Jones <bjones(a)cte.net> > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: Q: IP Space Management Software > Date: Thursday, March 12, 1998 4:08 PM > > At 03:16 PM 3/12/98 -0500, you wrote: > > > >Are any of you using software that you would recommend for large-scale > >management of IP space across AS', subnets from /16 to /32, > >differentiating IP blocks from IP hosts? > > > >Would love to hear from you if you do! > > > >Mike. > > Excel !...hehe, I would (obviously) also love to hear if somebody is using > something better, that is commercially available. I would worry about the > program's ability to handle VLSM. > > Brantley

1 0

So, 11.3 anyone?
by Alex Rubenstein 12 Mar '98

12 Mar '98

So, a potential reason came up for me to possibly run 11.3. I really don't want to, but I am comtemplating it. Apparently, 11.3 has code to fast-switch policy-routed networks. Does it work? Is 11.3 really usable? I am scared to death, but may need this for a certain application. Any comments are welcome.

7 9

cisco digression
by Jared Mauch 12 Mar '98

12 Mar '98

Might i recommend taking this to cisco-nsp(a)iagnet.net Folks from cisco are on that list, and most of this software stuff, etc.. is better placed there. You can do this: echo subscribe cisco-nsp | mail majordomo(a)iagnet.net or do the relevant things with your mail software. - jared -- Work: jared(a)qual.net - We Make The Internet Work for Your Business 9-5pm(ET) 800 637 4424x2634 - 24x7 NOC - 800 424 3223 pgp key available via finger from jared(a)puck.nether.net

1 0

RE: Question on filter-list config with peer goups
by Steve James 12 Mar '98

12 Mar '98

Andrew, I believe its because you already have an outbound filter in place and the peer-group is only allowed a single uniform outbound filter set. Sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong :-) . If you want to do this you'll need a seperate group :( "Members of a peer group inherit all of the configuration options of the peer group. Peer group members can also be configured to override configuration options if the options do not affect outgoing updates. That is, you can only override options that are set for incoming updates." http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/ics/icsbgp4.htm#xtocid2260… Steve -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Brown [SMTP:andrew.brown@corp.istar.ca] Sent: Thursday, March 12, 1998 5:01 PM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Question on filter-list config with peer goups Question: WHen you have a peer configured in a peer group the peering session policy is implemenated according to the peer group definition ie: <bigger>neighbor testgroup peer-group neighbor testgroup remote-as 2493 neighbor testgroup update-source Loopback0 neighbor testgroup send-community neighbor testgroup version 4 neighbor testgroup route-map mci-bbone out neighbor testgroup filter-list 70 out </bigger> <bigger>neighbor 130.200.17.250 peer-group testgroup neighbor 150.300.12.13 peer-group testgroup Why is it that when I try to remove the filter-list statement out of the peer group definition it gives me an error?? It appears you cannot assign different filter-lists to individual members of a peer-group. ie no neighbor testgroup filter-list 70 out = works OK then .. neighbor 130.200.17.250 filter-list 70 out produces this error % Invalid command for a peer-group member </bigger>I am trying to apply a different filter-list to different members of the same peer group. Can anyone offer their advice/experience greatly appreciated - I am definitly stuck here! Andrew --------------------------------><<------------------------- Andrew Brown - Internetwork Design Engineer - Service Development iSTAR internet inc Tel: (613)780-2210 250 Albert Street Fax: (613)780-6666 Ottawa, Ont, Canada K1P 6M1

1 0

Question on filter-list config with peer goups
by Andrew Brown 12 Mar '98

12 Mar '98

Question: WHen you have a peer configured in a peer group the peering session policy is implemenated according to the peer group definition ie: <bigger>neighbor testgroup peer-group neighbor testgroup remote-as 2493 neighbor testgroup update-source Loopback0 neighbor testgroup send-community neighbor testgroup version 4 neighbor testgroup route-map mci-bbone out neighbor testgroup filter-list 70 out </bigger> <bigger>neighbor 130.200.17.250 peer-group testgroup neighbor 150.300.12.13 peer-group testgroup Why is it that when I try to remove the filter-list statement out of the peer group definition it gives me an error?? It appears you cannot assign different filter-lists to individual members of a peer-group. ie no neighbor testgroup filter-list 70 out = works OK then .. neighbor 130.200.17.250 filter-list 70 out produces this error % Invalid command for a peer-group member </bigger>I am trying to apply a different filter-list to different members of the same peer group. Can anyone offer their advice/experience greatly appreciated - I am definitly stuck here! Andrew --------------------------------><<------------------------- Andrew Brown - Internetwork Design Engineer - Service Development iSTAR internet inc Tel: (613)780-2210 250 Albert Street Fax: (613)780-6666 Ottawa, Ont, Canada K1P 6M1

3 2

ios images ?
by Stuart Bryant 12 Mar '98

12 Mar '98

hi, were looking at various ios images to use so we can standardise across the network. were looking at ios version 11.2(9)P or 11.2(10)P does anyone have any warstories to share about these ? good points/bad points ? things i should be watch out for ? regards, stuart bryant stuartb(a)paradox.net.au cabinet maker/plumber paradox digital ph +61 8 9201 9201 f +61 8 9201 9200 founding member: fellowship of beer. i used to bite (tm)

11 11

Re: More smurf fun
by Scott Gifford 12 Mar '98

12 Mar '98

>Here's the latest group of smurf-able networks. Note some cool, >high-connectivity networks are on here, like Bay Networks. >At least one was still active on mae-west, if you can believe it. > [ ... ] Is there any good reason I shouldn't ask my upstream network providers to filter all packets coming in to our network with one of these source addresses? And is there any good reason this wouldn't very effectively prevent us from being a Smurf target? Thanks for any thoughts/info, ------Scott.

5 4

UUNET/Capacity
by jamie＠iagnet.net 11 Mar '98

11 Mar '98

Anyone from UUNET backbone engr. here? I need to talk with a uunet backbone engr. re: capacity at different POPs. I have a customer we're working with that is at several UUNET POPs, I need to get some info that front-line people don't have :) (Specifically, relationships inbetween UUNET pops) Pls use the reply-to here, reply private.. TIA.. -jamie -- james g.k. rishaw efnet:gavroche --> IAG/CIC/QualNet Contractor (I'd rather be hated for something I am than loved for something I'm not).

1 0

Re: MCI NOC
by Tony Li 11 Mar '98

11 Mar '98

rirving(a)onecall.net (Richard Irving) writes: > I understand they had an earthquake..... We _always_ have earthquakes. They are a daily phenomenon. The question is, do they 'count'? We haven't had an interesting one in a while. See http://www.scecdc.scec.org/recenteqs/ Tony

2 1