Johnny, that's just an example graph - we have all the links etc collected as CSV too, which can be manipulated etc. Admittedly the bridge adds some weirdness to this all, if everything was multinet then the walk would be easy :) sampsa On 12 Jan 2013, at 15:06, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote: On 2013-01-12 11:41, sampsa at mac.com wrote: Bit more accurate, if messier: http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap3.svg If you ask me, I think this idea is dead. You cannot get a good representation of how the topology really is from trying to walk nodes using NCP. The above picture is a good example of the problems. Looking at it from my point of view, MIM, PONDUS, ERSATZ, TARDIS, WXP and JOCKE are all actually sitting one common ethernet. All the lines and seemingly relative locations are just incorrect. This time, it would appear as if SG1.1 were the bridged ethernet. But the picture does it wrong anyway, since there are no multinet tunnels on the bridge. That would suggest that SG1.1 is some kind of merging of several actual networks, with no real corresponding entity at all. Johnny sampsa On 12 Jan 2013, at 10:45, hvlems at zonnet.nl wrote: That seems to be more in agreement with what A44RTR sees of Hecnet: 5 areas (9,42,52,59,61) are reachable thru dimma, 4 (18,19,20,33) via SG1 and 3 (3,7,8) via Gorvax. -----Original Message----- From: Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> Sender: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:07:54 To: <hecnet at Update.UU.SE> Reply-To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE Subject: Re: [HECnet] Mapping - getting close On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:06, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote: On Jan 11, 2013, at 22:03, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote: On 11 Jan 2013, at 22:01, Brian Hechinger <wonko at 4amlunch.net> wrote: On Jan 11, 2013, at 21:15, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote: On 11 Jan 2013, at 21:14, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote: On 2013-01-12 00:37, sampsa at mac.com wrote: Another with some overlap but less horizontal space: http://rhesus.sampsa.com/hnmap2.svg Looks rather weird. I assume PONDUS.637 is actually an attempt at the ethernet bridge, but it don't match reality much. Also, totally missing some areas, like area 59 And area 9 but Ciscos aren't handled yet. :p I'm working on that. :) What's the current plan for solving it? I'm concurrently attacking it from three different directions: ssh, snmp and mop remote console. My virtual cisco only supports SSH1. ;) I probably misconfigured SNMP. MOP remote console might work! How would I test again? First one done wins. :) I'd like to get all three working though for ultimate flexibility. -brian -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff! http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet project. -- Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus || on a psychedelic trip email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol