HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Olav.Kvittem@delab.sintef.no
Subject: Re: re:ip tcp header-compression experience 
Organization: SINTEF, Trondheim, Norway.
Date: 25 Jan 93 10:25:36

> We have compression running on several low speed links. The users
> perception of response has not been improved. I think there may
> be a threshold were the benifits of header compression can be
> realized as far as the clock speed of the link. We seem to see
> better compression performance on 56k than 19k links.

What about higher speed links - how fast can a cisco run 
TCP Header compression - can it be done on 512 Kbps links and
if so - what CPU-size is needed ?

Does the number of simultanesous sessions have to be limited to
allow any effect ?

Olav 

--
   Olav Kvittem : SINTEF

      RFC Address     Olav.Kvittem@delab.sintef.no
      OR Address      C=no;ADMD=" ";PRMD=uninett;
                      O=sintef;OU=delab;S=Kvittem;G=Olav
      Postal Address  SINTEF DELAB
                      N-7034 Trondheim
      Phone           +47-7-532586(FAX)
      Phone           +47-7-596981
      Description     Research Scientist  -  Communication Networks

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: dennis@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Doug Dennis)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
Subject: Re: Info needed on connecting to a hub router via fiber
Date: 27 Jan 93 17:00:00 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada

In <1k4emjINNpb5@uwm.edu> jeff@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Jeff Olenchek) writes:

>We would like to connect ethernets/routers in remote buildings to
>a cisco router, located at a central site, with minimal cost.
>I've seen some info on fiber transceivers and was wondering if
>they work back-to-back or in some other combination.
>If you have done this, please email me a description.
>Thank you,
>  jeff@uwm.edu


>	Router connected to an ethernet located in another building

>							       coax
>	router	      aui	     fiber	       aui	| |
>		       | 	       |		|	| |
>  ------------------   v	       v		v	| |
>  |		   |		        			| |
>  |	ethernet   =========[?] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [?]=========[transciever]
>  |		   |						| |
>  ------------------						| |

Yes, in this case the [?] on the left would be a FOT (fiber optic transceiver
such as a Cabletron FOT)  and on the right side, you would install something
like a Cabletron COFOT (coaxial to fiber optic extended media adapter)  You
connect the fiber and your thin coax to  the cofot.


	Router connected to another router located in another building


>	router	      aui	     fiber	       aui      router
>		       | 	       |	        |
>  ------------------   v	       v		v   -----------------
>  |		   |					    |               |
>  |	ethernet   =========[?] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [?]=========  ethernet     |
>  |		   |                                        |               |
>  ------------------			                    -----------------

We do this as well.  Your '[?]'s would be fiber optic transceivers (FOT's)



Doug Dennis                         dennis@ccu.umanitoba.ca
University of Manitoba              PH: (204) 474-8290
Computer Services                   FAX:(204) 275-5420
Rm. 630 Engineering Bldg.
Winnipeg, MB. Canada                "If it weren't for the last minute, 
R3T 2N2                                       nothing would ever get done."
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: "Brad (B.M.) Glidewell" <nvbmg01@nt.com>
Subject: re:ip tcp header-compression experience 
Content-Identifier: re:ip tcp hea... 
X400-Mts-Identifier: [/PRMD=NT/ADMD=MCI/C=US/;bcars567.n.467:23.00.93.15.41.46] 
X400-Content-Type: P2-1984 (2) 
Date: 23 Jan 1993 07:41:00 +0000 
X400-Originator: /DD.ID=nvbmg01/G=Brad/I=BM/S=Glidewell/@nt.com 
X-Note1: message-id generated by recnews
X400-Received: by /PRMD=NT/ADMD=MCI/C=US/; Relayed; 
               Sat, 23 Jan 1993 01:41:00 -0600 
X-Note2: mail msgid was   <"18479 Sat Jan 23 10:42:04 1993"@nt.com> 

We have compression running on several low speed links. The users
perception of response has not been improved. I think there may
be a threshold were the benifits of header compression can be
realized as far as the clock speed of the link. We seem to see
better compression performance on 56k than 19k links.


Brad

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: asteiner@iti.org (Albert Steiner)
Subject: Unix TACACS Client needed
Keywords: Remote Authentication
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 18:16:21 GMT

I am looking for a Unix TACACS client.

We are using a TACACS server for the clients on some cisco Comservers.
We now have an application for a machine which would like to do remote
authentication.  If we had kerberos that would be ideal.  I am looking
for a client that can go to existing TACACS servers and authenticate
users (probably some form of Telnetd)

Albert Steiner
Northwestern University
a-steiner@nwu.edu
From: jimo@cisco.com (Jim Oneil)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
Subject: Re: IGS vs 3000
Date: 22 Jan 1993 06:13:28 GMT
Organization: cisco Systems, Incorporated
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: stout.cisco.com

In article <1jo12hINNfd3@roche.csl.sri.com>, pcorless@cisco.com (Peter Corless) writes:
|> 
|> 
|> The IGS/TR is based on the 68030 processor. It can be upgraded to use
|> Flash RAM and up to 4mb Dynamic RAM.

Flash is actually an EPROM technology.

|> 
|> The Cisco 3000 series are all based on the 68030, and have 2mb Flash RAM
|> standard. They can be upgraded to 16MB Dynamic RAM.
|> 
|> The IGS line is the lowest-cost router in our product line. It supports all
|> current software versions, up to 9.1.2 (although this requires the 4mb DRAM
|> option be installed).
|> 
|> The 3000 series is a notch above the IGS in terms of performance and
|> expandability. The Flash capability of the 3000 means that it can receive
|> software upgrades without having to touch the box.

The Flash Memory is also on SIMMs to make it easy to add higher densities
in the future if needed.  Only the ethernet versions use SIMMs.

|> 
|> -Peter Corless.
|>

-Jimo
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: wrl@wdl1.wdl.loral.com (Bill Lewandowski)
Subject: AppleTalk Routing in a Redundant Network
Date: 28 Jan 93 06:20:08 -0800
X-Note1: message-id generated by recnews
X-Note2: mail msgid was   <9301281420.AA28538@wdl1.wdl.loral.com>

Hi,

We are about to reconfigure our nationwide network from a "Star" to a
"race-track" configuration. This new network will be a triangle with
256Kbps circuits connecting the three "core" sites.

Question: How does AppleTalk handle a network that is "circular" in nature ?

Has anyone seen any problem in this type of implementation ???

We are going to be running 9.1(*) on the core routers.

Thanks,

Bill
===============================================================
Bill Lewandowski		LORAL Western Development Labs
(408) 473-4362			Internet: wrl@wdl1.wdl.loral.com
FAX: (408) 473-4440		Location: B260-3 Cube 10
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: mattas@ICIL64.CILEA.IT (Andrea Mattasoglio)
Subject: Using cisco for bridging messages between Unisys DCP
Organization: CILEA - v R. Sanzio 4 - Segrate - ITALY
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 08:58:47 GMT
Reply-To: mattas@ICIL64.CILEA.IT

I need to use cisco-router for bridging traffic from Unisys DCP frontends
with Ethernet interfaces. Following the Unisys directions and some hints from
Sniffer trace I came to the following configuration. Some traffic comes through
but it doesn't work. Can anybody give me some advise ? Thank you very much.
>!
>interface Serial 2
>description Politecnico di Milano
>ip address 131.175.252.1 255.255.255.0
>bandwidth 2048
>decnet cost 1
>novell network 252
>bridge-group 1
>bridge-group 1 path-cost 64
>bridge-group 1 input-type-list 201
>bridge-group 1 output-lat-service-permit 2
>!
>interface Ethernet 0
>ip address 131.175.1.10 255.255.255.0
>decnet cost 1
>bridge-group 1
>bridge-group 1 input-lsap-list 202
>bridge-group 1 input-type-list 201
>no mop enabled
>!
>bridge 1 protocol dec
>bridge 1 lat-service-filtering
>access-list 201 permit 0x6004 0x0000
>access-list 201 deny   0x0000 0xFFFF
>access-list 202 permit 0x0404 0x0000
>access-list 202 permit 0xACAC 0x0000
>access-list 202 permit 0xACAD 0x0000
>access-list 202 deny   0x0000 0xFFFF
>priority-list 1 protocol bridge high list 201
>priority-list 1 protocol ip medium
>priority-list 1 protocol decnet medium
>priority-list 1 default low
>!
Andrea Mattasoglio
CILEA via Raffaello Sanzio 4 I 20090 Segrate Milano
Tel.    +39 2 26922434 - Telex   310330 - Telefax +39 2 2135520
Bitnet:  MATTAS@IMICLVX - E-Mail : MATTAS@CILEA.IT
From: simpsong@dns0.bham.ac.uk (Glyn Simpson)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
Subject: Routing Problem ?
Date: 27 Jan 1993 10:50:34 GMT
Organization: The University of Birmingham, England
Reply-To: G.Simpson@bham.ac.uk
NNTP-Posting-Host: dns0.bham.ac.uk
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

I think this is more of a software problem rather than a routing problem.
I'm running 8.2(7) on out Cisco AGS+/3 quite successfully until a few
days ago. During that time, we lost our X.25 link to the outside world,
through which we encapsulate our IP packets. When the line was down, a
host on our local network broadcast to fact that it knew how to get to 
the route 0.0.0.0 (ie the default) in 2 hops (yes, one hop to itself,
and one back to the cisco) - hence a routing loop was formed. 

This isnt the problem though. The problem then occurred in that the 
Cisco changed its configuration to point to this host as the default
route, and subsequently, when the X.25 switch was brought back up, 
routing was mangled.

Is this a known problem, and do i need to upgrade software (i think one
is on the cards when we *finally* get the FDDI card we've been promised
for months, and has not yet appeared. 

Thanks in advance.

--
Glyn Simpson, Systems Officer,  //  Voice: +44 (0) 21 414 6575
University of Birmingham        //  Fax:   +44 (0) 21 414 3952
Email: G.Simpson@bham.ac.uk     //  NIC Handle: GS56
From: jrb@idx.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
Subject: Anyone using ATG?
Date: 27 Jan 93 14:02:48 GMT
Organization: IDX Corporation, S. Burlington, VT

Hi Folks,

I have Cisco 4000 and an IGS/R.  The 4000 is running version 9.1 and the IGS/R is running 8.3.  I am trying to use the
address translation gateway feature to connect two decnet networks that have addresses in the same decnet area via a 56k phone line.
I have been unable to get this working.  The Tech support folk at cisco now say that the ATG function will only work if you are
mapping the addresses on a single local router, and not accross a phone circuit.  

Is this true?  Can this be possible?  It makes the ATG functionality near useless as far as I can tell.... it would only work if
were routing between two local ethernets.  I'm surprised because I was very clear when I purchased the Ciscos about what I am
trying to do, and I was assured the the ATG functionality would work.  Is anyone out there using it?

Thanks,
Jim Bresee
jrb@idx.com

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: ajj@beta.lanl.gov (Andrew J. Johnson)
Subject: Cisco 3000
Keywords: Cisco 3000, bridge 
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:14:29 GMT

Does anyone have any experience using 3000 as a pure Ethernet
bridge? Contrast with performance of a DEC LANbridge.

-- 
                                       Andy Johnson
                                       Westinghouse Savannah River Company
                                       ajj@srs.gov
                                       (803) 644-1493
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: John Bashinski <jbash@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Anyone using ATG? 
             <1993Jan27.140248.68@idx.com> 
Date: 27 Jan 93 20:32:33 -0800
X-Note1: message-id generated by recnews
X-Note2: mail msgid was   <9301280432.AA13058@wolf.cisco.com>

> I have Cisco 4000 and an IGS/R.  The 4000 is running version 9.1 and
> the IGS/R is running 8.3.  I am trying to use the address translation
> gateway feature to connect two decnet networks that have addresses in
> the same decnet area via a 56k phone line. I have been unable to get
> this working.  The Tech support folk at cisco now say that the ATG
> function will only work if you are mapping the addresses on a single
> local router, and not accross a phone circuit.

I'm not sure what they meant by this. While it's true that the ATG
works entirely inside a single router, all that means is that one
of the two routers is (probably) doing all the translation work, and
the other isn't aware that translation is being done. The ATG most
certainly does work over serial lines. It's even *possible* to enable
it in routers on both ends of a line, although it's not usually necessary
to enable it in more than one router to get the job done.

Without knowing exactly what you're trying to do, I can't say why the
CE people didn't think it was possible to do it. If you'll send me
a detailed description of your application, I'll be happy to check
on it. Maybe I can figure out a way to do what you want, or at least
to give a better explanation of why it can't be done. Please include
your CE case number and/or the name of the person in CE with whom you
were working on this.

> Is this true?  Can this be possible?  It makes the ATG functionality
> near useless as far as I can tell.... it would only work if were routing
> between two local ethernets.  I'm surprised because I was very clear
> when I purchased the Ciscos about what I am trying to do, and I was
> assured the the ATG functionality would work.  Is anyone out there
> using it?

I'm not sure how *many* people are using the ATG, but it definitely is
used, and many of the most common applications involve serial lines.

				-- J. Bashinski
				   Cisco Systems
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: aggarwal@nisc.jvnc.net (Vikas Aggarwal)
Subject: Aux port for dial backup ??
Date: 25 Jan 93 16:28:12 EST
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
X-Note1: message-id generated by recnews
X-Note2: mail msgid was   <9301252128.AA17718@nisc.jvnc.net>

Does cisco have any plans for allowing the aux port as a dial-backup
line ? This would be nice for hardware that has only one serial interface
(IGS's, etc.).

	-vikas
	vikas@jvnc.net
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: Sam Wilson <ercm20@festival.ed.ac.uk>
Subject: Cisco, SMDS and multiple LISs
Reply-To: Sam.Wilson@edinburgh.ac.uk
Date: 28 Jan 93 10:48:52 GMT
X-Note1: message-id generated by recnews
Via: uk.ac.edinburgh.festival; Thu, 28 Jan 1993 10:49:19 +0000
X-Note2: mail msgid was   <9301281049.aa25796@uk.ac.ed.festival>

Looking for a snippet of technical advice...

I'm involved in a project looking at how we might set up a large
SMDS-based IP network.  One of the issues is whether we run multiple
Logical IP Subnets (LISs) or one large LIS.  Before you say anything I'm
not looking for advice on that at the moment! RFC 1209 recommends that
IP-over-SMDS equipment should allow multiple LISs on the same SMDS
interface using different E.164 group addresses (thus allowing a router
between LISs to use a single i/f).  Some of my colleagues who met Cisco
people recently say that the Cisco folk said that's what Cisco does. 

Unfortunately there's no trace of this in the manual: I have the 9.1
Router Products Configuration and Reference and have also looked at the
Errata and 9.1(1) and 9.1(2) release notes but none shows any method of
setting multiple group addresses.  Is this an undocumented feature or is
it planned for a future release? If the latter then which and when?

For what it's worth the command to set the group address is

   smds multicast ip <smds-group-addr>

I'd have expected

   smds multicast ip <smds-group-addr> [<ip-net> <mask>]


Sam Wilson
Network Services Division
Computing Services, The University of Edinburgh
Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: garyb@gcm.com (Gary Blumenstein)
Subject: IP Encapsulation
Organization: Greenwich Capital Markets, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 15:37:57 GMT

I have two networks connected via fractional T1 (128kbps) using 
the HSC V.35 interfaces between an AGS+ and IGS/R routers.  This setup  
replaced an older set of Sun gateways running Brixton PPP.

I set the routers up using PPP encapsulation without realizing 
that it might not be necessary.  My initial thought was that since
I was using the serial interfaces, than I would have to use a serial
based protocol.  Is this true?  Can I turn off PPP encapsulation. 
and run straight IP between the two routers.  Without knowing how much
overhead the PPP is adding, I'd imagine we'd see better perfomance
without it.

Now the important question;  Can I turn this off without disrupting
the network?  Or will I loose the connection?

- Gary 

-- 
Gary Blumenstein                          |   garyb@gcm.com        Internet
Unix Systems Administrator                |   uunet!gcm!garyb      UUCP
Greenwich Capital Markets                 |  +1(203) 625-7937      Voice 
600 Steamboat Road, Greenwich, CT  06830  |  +1(203) 629-9136      FAX
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: RON ZELMAN <rzelman@smtplink.coh.org>
Subject: Novell Print Servers
Date: 27 Jan 93 17:37:07 PST
X-Note1: message-id generated by recnews
X-Note2: mail msgid was   <9301271737.A01437@smtplink.coh.org>

I'm having trouble with a Castelle LanPress print server finding a Novell 
file server that is not on its own subnet.  Before we installed our AGS+ 
routers the print server and file server were on the same Novell network.  
Now they are separated by an FDDI backbone.  I've tried flooding all Novell 
broadcasts over the interfaces via the following commands:

access-list 901 permit 0 -1
int fddi 0
novell helper-address -1.ffff.ffff.ffff
novell helper-list 901
novell network 100
int e 0
novell helper-address -1.ffff.ffff.ffff
novell helper-list 901
novell network 5

The novell network numbers on the ethernet interfaces are different for the 
various subnets.

Novell workstations on the same subnet as the print server can login to any 
file server regardless of which subnet it is on.
If I move the print server to the same subnet as the file server it will 
attach.

Any suggestions?  Do any of you use print servers in this fashion?  Thanks 
in advance.

*************************************************************************
Ronald J. Zelman                         Internet:  rzelman@coh.org
Technical Services Manager
City Of Hope Medical Center
Duarte, CA  91010
*************************************************************************

Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: jmills@cass.ma02.bull.com (John Luke Mills)
Subject: OSPF path costs vs. Bandwidth
Organization: Bull World Wide Information Systems Inc.
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 20:02:38 GMT


In my mostly OSPF network some of the OSPF interface costs are not
what I expect.  The interface costs of all my serial links are 1562.
This is the correct value for 64kbps links.  I don't have any 64kbps
serial links.  I have lots of 56's, some full t1's, and fraction t1's.
I did not set any ospf costs and just took the defaults.

The manual states that different physical interfaces have different
defaults and provides a table of some common link speeds and metrics.
It also states that the "no ip ospf cost" command resets the path cost
for an interface to the default value.

I took this to mean that by default ospf would determine the link
speed of each interface and set the metric accordingly, but this
didn't happen.

It appears that this is not related to the bandwidth parameter for the
interfaces.  I never use any bandwidth commands and all my serial
links report a bandwidth of 1544kbs, that for a full t1 link.

Is OSPF supposed to be able to set the interface cost itself?  

If so, where does it get its information?

If it is the bandwidth parameter, is this supposed to be set manually?

On DTE interfaces is the bandwidth parameter supposed to be set
automatically by looking at the provided clock?

Most of my routers run 9.0(1) if it matters.  Obviously this isn't a
big deal since I can manually set any costs I want where it matters.
I would like to know what is really supposed to be happening.

-- 




Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: ncherry@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (neil j.cherry)
Subject: Re: Anyone using ATG?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:26:35 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.140248.68@idx.com> jrb@idx.com writes:
>Hi Folks,
>
>I have Cisco 4000 and an IGS/R.  The 4000 is running version 9.1 and the
>IGS/R is running 8.3.  I am trying to use the
>address translation gateway feature to connect two decnet networks that
>have addresses in the same decnet area via a 56k phone line.
>I have been unable to get this working.  The Tech support folk at cisco
>now say that the ATG function will only work if you are
>mapping the addresses on a single local router, and not accross a phone
>circuit.  
>
>Is this true?  Can this be possible?  It makes the ATG functionality near
>useless as far as I can tell.... it would only work if
>were routing between two local ethernets.  I'm surprised because I was
>very clear when I purchased the Ciscos about what I am
>trying to do, and I was assured the the ATG functionality would work.
>Is anyone out there using it?
>
>Thanks,
>Jim Bresee
>jrb@idx.com
>

I know a group that is using it on an AGS+, from what you've said above Cisco
is right, but it does work. Now the explaination, you load the ATG on 1 router
using its serial port as 1 set of addrs and the ether as the other. The router
running on the other end of the connection is just running as a DECnet router.
Unfortunately I don't remember if the router not running ATG is a local router
or not, sorry.

NJC
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
From: Buehler@worldbank.org (Paul Buehler)
Subject: AGS+ and FOIRL Solution?
Organization: World Bank
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 20:04:38 GMT

 Does anybody know of a better way to connect a bunch of FOIRL circuits
to an AGS+? I've got MEC-6 card and currently use the Canary MX FOIRL
tranceivers and just attach them using the slide connector (joke) to the
back of the router.
Organisation: European Space Operation Centre (E.S.O.C)
Date: Monday, 25 Jan 1993 09:59:00 CET
From: <RHUNTER@ESOC.BITNET>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
Subject:    4000 & FDDI

I have heard a rumour that FDDI will be supported on the Cisco 4000 box
some time 3Q93. Can anyone confirm or deny this?

This would suit me fine, as I see a need for a box with 2 or 4 Ethernets
plus FDDI translational bridging. Putting an AGS+ in every wiring centre
seems to be a great deal of overkill.

BTW has anyone got any experience with other manufacturers' versions of this
sort of box? I have seen glossys from Fibronics NSC 3Com Schneider und Koch
Alantec and Crescendo: or should I post to alt.religion.dcom.heresy? ;-)
From: jeff@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Jeff Olenchek)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
Subject: Info needed on connecting to a hub router via fiber
Date: 26 Jan 93 22:41:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: uwm.1k4emjINNpb5
Distribution: usa
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: jeff@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

We would like to connect ethernets/routers in remote buildings to
a cisco router, located at a central site, with minimal cost.
I've seen some info on fiber transceivers and was wondering if
they work back-to-back or in some other combination.
If you have done this, please email me a description.
Thank you,
  jeff@uwm.edu


	Router connected to an ethernet located in another building

							       coax
	router	      aui	     fiber	       aui	| |
		       | 	       |		|	| |
  ------------------   v	       v		v	| |
  |		   |		        			| |
  |	ethernet   =========[?] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [?]=========[transciever]
  |		   |						| |
  ------------------						| |

	Router connected to another router located in another building


	router	      aui	     fiber	       aui      router
		       | 	       |	        |
  ------------------   v	       v		v   -----------------
  |		   |					    |               |
  |	ethernet   =========[?] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [?]=========  ethernet     |
  |		   |                                        |               |
  ------------------			                    -----------------
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco