nanog mailing list archives
Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?
From: Seth Mattinen <sethm () rollernet us>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 08:29:07 -0800
On 1/11/11 6:49 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
To be honest, I use smartnet to upgrade the OS. I quit calling TAC after they failed to understand, much less help me with my eigrp over frame relay with automatic ISDN backup on route failure and re-establishment of eigrp over the ISDN. :)
The cisco-nsp mailing list is often much more helpful than TAC. ~Seth
Current thread:
- RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you?, (continued)
- RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Justin M. Streiner (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Greg Whynott (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? lorddoskias (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Greg Whynott (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Jack Bates (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? b nickell (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Miquel van Smoorenburg (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Jethro R Binks (Jan 11)
- RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Brandon Kim (Jan 11)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Jack Bates (Jan 11)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Seth Mattinen (Jan 11)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Greg Whynott (Jan 10)
- RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Justin M. Streiner (Jan 11)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Ron Broersma (Jan 11)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Charles N Wyble (Jan 10)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Chuck Anderson (Jan 13)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Herro91 (Jan 13)
- RE: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Brandon Kim (Jan 13)
- Re: Is Cisco equpiment de facto for you? Tony Varriale (Jan 13)