Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 2 Sep 2001 22:17:38 -0700
From:      "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com>
To:        "Joe Clarke" <marcus@marcuscom.com>, "Chip" <chip@wiegand.org>
Cc:        <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   RE: replacing a cisco router with a fbsd box
Message-ID:  <000401c13437$bfa39920$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20010902234540.I17519-100000@shumai.marcuscom.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Just be sure that you are running current code or an access list because
there were several security holes discovered in Cisco IOS.

If you do a "sh hard" or a "sh ver" what is the IOS version?

Ted Mittelstaedt                                       tedm@toybox.placo.com
Author of:                           The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide
Book website:                          http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Joe Clarke [mailto:marcus@marcuscom.com]
>Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 8:47 PM
>To: Chip
>Cc: Ted Mittelstaedt; freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
>Subject: Re: replacing a cisco router with a fbsd box
>
>
>Telnet is one way of going, but if the router isn't allowing connections,
>you'll need to do it from the console.  I can also send you a good list of
>SNMP objects for polling if you'd like that.
>
>Joe
>
>On Sun, 2 Sep 2001, Chip wrote:
>
>> On Sunday 02 September 2001 09:40, Joe Clarke wrote:
>> > I believe the NAT bug you're referring to has been fixed.
>However, if you
>> > send me some details, I'd be happy to verify for you.
>> >
>> > Yes, FreeBSD's NAT isn't as feature-rich as Cisco's, but the libalias
>> > stuff is easy to add protocol support to.  I just added TFTP to the tree,
>> > and internal to Cisco, I've added another protocol for IP telephony.
>> >
>> > As for the crash/hang.  Yeah, if it hangs, you're screwed.  It's hard to
>> > troubleshoot those kind of things if you can't produce any kind of error
>> > messages.  In those cases, obtaining information regularly like
>show proc,
>> > show proc cpu, show buff, and show log can help.
>>
>> Are those run on the router via telnet?
>>
>> --
>> Chip
>>
>> >
>> > Joe
>> >
>> > On Sun, 2 Sep 2001, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>> > > >-----Original Message-----
>> > > >From: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
>> > > >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Joe Clarke
>> > > >
>> > > >I realize I'm coming in a bit late on this, but I work for Cisco TAC,
>> > > > and can say that with the recent Code Red thing, our NAT has
>seen a lot
>> > > > of work.  There have been bugs filed to be sure.
>> > >
>> > > I hope that you fix the one where the Cisco NAT doesen't tear down the
>> > > address map as soon as the connection is closed.  I saw that one on a
>> > > 1005 running early 12.0 code when someone asked us why they
>could Telnet
>> > > into a JetDirect card from the Internet that in reality had a private
>> > > network number. Turned out they were telnetting into the
>overload number
>> > > on a nat pool on the 1005.  I never did get around to writing
>that one up
>> > > because I figured it was an
>> > > obvious hole that would be caught, but if your interested I'll
>dig up the
>> > > particulars.
>> > >
>> > >   Offloading NAT from a
>> > >
>> > > >router with a small amount of RAM will improve packet flow to be sure.
>> > > > In fact, if you're experiencing lock-ups, I'd try that.  It may help
>> > > > you isolate the problem.  FreeBSD's NAT is pretty good for most
>> > > > standard protocols.  I've found it's relatively easy to add
>support to.
>> > >
>> > > But it doesen't so the DNS trick that you guys do which is very useful.
>> > > :-(
>> > >
>> > > >Also, if you do find yourself having to reload, see if you're getting
>> > > > any tracebacks.  Do a show ver or show stack, and see what
>you can see.
>> > > >  Those memory addresses can be useful for tracking down bugs.
>> > >
>> > > He was saying that when the router got hosed that they had to
>power-cycle
>> > > which I take it to mean the device froze.  It sounds suspiciously like
>> > > flakey hardware to me.  Maybe someone upgraded the ram with some random
>> > > PC memory they had lying around?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Ted Mittelstaedt
>> > > tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of:                           The FreeBSD
>> > > Corporate Networker's Guide Book website:
>> > > http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Chip W.
>>
>>
>
>


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000401c13437$bfa39920$1401a8c0>