Re: NANOG applicability (was: RE: )

[john heasley <heas () shrubbery net>]

On Thu, Sep 23, 1999 at 09:16:05AM -0700, dave o'leary wrote:
> At 05:45 AM 9/22/99 -0700, Derek Balling wrote:
>
> > So now, even the age-old "litmus test" of "how do I program my Cisco to do 
> > that?" is a bad one?
>
> Actually, in the case of service providers, this is exactly why the
> "cisco-nsp () puck nether net" was established.  Well, it wasn't really
> established at that site, but that's where it migrated later.  The list
> is available for discussion of cisco service provider specific discussions
> just like this one.  If you want to talk about Juniper routers, on the
> other hand.... :-) :-)
>                                                  dave

dave, i believe juniper-nsp () puck nether net already exists.

> > At 01:09 AM 9/22/99 -0700, Mike Leber wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Don't mean to be rude, these questions would be more appropriate for
> > > inet-access, et al.  Most people on this list are national or
> > > international backbone operators.  Appropriate topics concern operating
> > > backbones.
> > >
> > > On Tue, 21 Sep 1999, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm looking similarly, but T1/PRI for dial-in support and a T3 to the
> > > > Internet.
> > > > Got Cisco 6509 on the Internet side and Ascend MAX 6000 on the WAN side.
> > > > Bothe managed by Checkpoint, on a Sun Ultra5.
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu]On Behalf Of
> > > > > Gerry McDonald
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 9:13 AM
> > > > > To: nanog () merit edu
> > > > > Subject:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I have a question... I am currently expanding our network to
> > > > > accommodate a T1 to the
> > > > > Internet and a 512K frame connection to our WAN.. I need to
> > > > > purchase a router and spoke
> > > > > to several vendors. I have heard conflicting stories
> > > > > regarding the model of Cisco router I
> > > > > should get.
> > > > >
> > > > > One vendor <vendor a> tells me that I should get a 2620 with
> > > > > 2 Wan Ports and the other
> > > > > vendor <vendor b> is telling me that I might compromise my
> > > > > security by using one router for
> > > > > WAN and Internet connections. Their suggesting that I get 2
> > > > > routers one for my Wan and
> > > > > another for the Internet connection...
> > > > >
> > > > > Vendor B is telling me that it would be possible to enter our
> > > > > wan without touching our firewall
> > > > > should someone be able to hack into our IOS on the router...
> > > > >
> > > > > I decided to go the experts... I would appreciate any helpful
> > > > > suggestions.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks...
> > > > >
> > > > > -Gerry
> > >
> > > +------------------- H U R R I C A N E - E L E C T R I C -------------------+
> > > | Mike Leber             Direct Internet Connections     Voice 408 282 1540 |
> > > | Hurricane Electric       Web Hosting  Colocation         Fax 408 971 3340 |
> > > | mleber () he net                                           http://www.he.net |
> > > +---------------------------------------------------------------------------+