nanog mailing list archives
Re: Website contact for www.cisco.com
From: Petri Helenius <pete () he iki fi>
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2004 23:52:54 +0300
joe mcguckin wrote:
Would that affect just one /32 out of a /22 if the subnet is not directly connected? (it probably would if you run some kind of ACL's that require flow state to be retained, but other than that, it should not) Obviously load balancers count as content switching devices which can also cause random brokenness.Or CEF/DCEF if a linecard 'loses' a forwarding entry.
Pete
On 9/26/04 1:03 PM, "Petri Helenius" <pete () he iki fi> wrote:Burton, Chris wrote:I also ran into this problem yesterday, I contacted Cisco and they said that they were not block any of my addresses or ranges which I found to be strange since from what I could tell out of an entire /22 only one IP address was affected. As of around 0500 PDT this morning I was able to access Cisco's website again though."Content switching", when partially broken, can do fancy effects. Pete
Current thread:
- Website contact for www.cisco.com Temkin, David (Sep 23)
- Re: Website contact for www.cisco.com Crist Clark (Sep 23)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Website contact for www.cisco.com Burton, Chris (Sep 23)
- Re: Website contact for www.cisco.com Petri Helenius (Sep 26)
- Re: Website contact for www.cisco.com joe mcguckin (Sep 26)
- Re: Website contact for www.cisco.com Petri Helenius (Sep 26)
- Re: Website contact for www.cisco.com Petri Helenius (Sep 26)
- RE: Website contact for www.cisco.com Burton, Chris (Sep 27)
- RE: Website contact for www.cisco.com Michael . Dillon (Sep 28)