I'll send out a "let me know if you aren't showing up" email when i'm ready to tackle stuff that's being missed.
Hang tight. :)
-brian
On 1/8/2013 9:47 AM, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote:
Area 44 is also missing. Anything I ought to have done?
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 09:33:27
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] _PROVISIONAL_ map of HECnet, courtesy largely of Brian
H.
On 1/7/2013 9:25 PM, Ian McLaughlin wrote:
Sampsa,
I appear to be missing. Are you able to add me?
No, you are missing because you can't currently be found.
We'll find you, be patient. :)
My area router is A42RTR 42.1023. It is adjacent to SUN 52.1 and GW 61.1. Unfortunately for your scanning program, 42.1023 is a Cisco router.
Yeah, Cisco routers have yet to be tackled.
-brian
On 1/7/2013 3:21 PM, Brian Schenkenberger, VAXman- wrote:
Can't you issue it from the command line? Python, if you are issuing the
command from os.system("TELL...") is probably just spawning off commands.
The context will be lost if that's the case.
I'm using is.popen(), so yeah, i think i'm out of luck in that case.
I'll just have to add some logic to maybe re-try the node if I get this.
-brian
On 1/6/2013 8:04 PM, Clem Cole wrote:
well the cluster stuff that TruCluster is based is already FOSS. checkout OpenSSI.org. sadly that tree is dead/or nearly so. Bruce stopped working on it and never was able to get the vproc layer into the Linux upstream sources. which is a real shame
Oh, nice!
Maybe we should get that somewhere else. Like NetBSD or rolled into the Illumos stuff. :)
-brian
Area 44 is also missing. Anything I ought to have done?
Hans
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net>
Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 09:33:27
To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE>
Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] _PROVISIONAL_ map of HECnet, courtesy largely of Brian
H.
On 1/7/2013 9:25 PM, Ian McLaughlin wrote:
Sampsa,
I appear to be missing. Are you able to add me?
No, you are missing because you can't currently be found.
We'll find you, be patient. :)
My area router is A42RTR 42.1023. It is adjacent to SUN 52.1 and GW 61.1. Unfortunately for your scanning program, 42.1023 is a Cisco router.
Yeah, Cisco routers have yet to be tackled.
-brian
On 1/8/2013 9:28 AM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2013-01-08 07:02, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 01/08/2013 12:53 AM, Ian McLaughlin wrote:
The problem with ssh is it's "out of band" as far as hecnet is
concerned. It would be nice if the discovery was purely decnet.
True.
Well, if one can define access lists using DECnet addresses as filter
terms, I'd be ok with that, for nonprivileged access.
I've just verified that a MOP console request works from Linux using
locally-stored authentication on the IOS side to establish a
nonprivileged IOS CLI session on a 7206VXR running IOS 12.3(22), like so:
$ moprc -v <MAC address>
...and like this from NCP under VMS:
NCP> connect node gw physical address <MAC address> via <circuit-name>
Note that the MAC address must have its octets delimited by colons
under Linux, and hyphens under VMS.
This is a service (protocol?) called Console Carrier Request. If you have Phase V, I think you use SET HOST/MOP under VMS.
Under RSX, there is a special program called CCR that you use.
And correct, this is not a routed protocol, so you need to be on the local network, and you cannot go through NCP on another machine using TELL. :-)
I'm going to play with this. I think this is the solution to keeping cisco queries in-band.
I'll report back on how I plan on using this.
-brian
On 1/7/2013 9:25 PM, Ian McLaughlin wrote:
Sampsa,
I appear to be missing. Are you able to add me?
No, you are missing because you can't currently be found.
We'll find you, be patient. :)
My area router is A42RTR 42.1023. It is adjacent to SUN 52.1 and GW 61.1. Unfortunately for your scanning program, 42.1023 is a Cisco router.
Yeah, Cisco routers have yet to be tackled.
-brian
On 1/7/2013 7:57 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
On 7 Jan 2013, at 19:54,sampsa at mac.com wrote:
>If we can't walk it by NCP, resutls are unpredictable.
You can, it just kinda has infinite loops and whatnot.
My code won't query a router more than once so loops are a non-issue.
-brian
On 2013-01-08 07:02, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 01/08/2013 12:53 AM, Ian McLaughlin wrote:
The problem with ssh is it's "out of band" as far as hecnet is
concerned. It would be nice if the discovery was purely decnet.
True.
Well, if one can define access lists using DECnet addresses as filter
terms, I'd be ok with that, for nonprivileged access.
I've just verified that a MOP console request works from Linux using
locally-stored authentication on the IOS side to establish a
nonprivileged IOS CLI session on a 7206VXR running IOS 12.3(22), like so:
$ moprc -v <MAC address>
...and like this from NCP under VMS:
NCP> connect node gw physical address <MAC address> via <circuit-name>
Note that the MAC address must have its octets delimited by colons
under Linux, and hyphens under VMS.
This is a service (protocol?) called Console Carrier Request. If you have Phase V, I think you use SET HOST/MOP under VMS.
Under RSX, there is a special program called CCR that you use.
And correct, this is not a routed protocol, so you need to be on the local network, and you cannot go through NCP on another machine using TELL. :-)
Johnny
On 1/7/2013 4:25 PM, Rob Jarratt wrote:
One of my plans was to extend the user mode router I wrote to interoperate
with Cisco. I don't believe it is all that hard to do. The code is written
to make this fairly easy.
As long as your router can talk to any interface it's just a matter of setting up a tunnel (GRE, IPsec, etc) on the host to connect to the cisco. You shouldn't need to do anything other than that.
-brian
On 1/7/2013 4:26 PM, Rob Jarratt wrote:
Because the one downside of the Cisco's is they don't speak NICE. It would
>be awesome if they did.
>
And adding NICE is also something I was thinking of adding to the user mode
router, but that is a bigger job than interoperating with Cisco I think.
Regards
I'd prefer NICE over cisco integration. :)
-brian