North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Cisco IOS Exploit Cover Up

  • From: David Barak
  • Date: Fri Jul 29 14:53:25 2005
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=v3LeR6BykCE90kDQoyMCekMdSNPD4H5AWCP+67jJsDv8PPoPh+oLHp2t6Rh0MkZoQOyA5tdq+bz8/gxzLWL6wQKu+LQw/2LcqQ2aBaqss3Cru7OMZnT+E3BFX1voP8lW5QhpzLCS9TeD7R9ePZFQ3F6IeqRNiMGQWdRRE9NgAas= ;

--- John Forrister <[email protected]> wrote:
> Indeed - Cisco's hardware, especially the older,
> smaller boxes, tended
> to be really solid once you got them running.  I was
> just pondering a 
> few minutes ago on how many 2500's I configured &
> installed in 1996 & 1997
> are still running today, on code that's no longer
> supported by
> Cisco, and which are incapable of taking enough
> flash to load a newer image.

As a definite example, A client of mine has a 1601
sitting on the end of a T1 running 11.3...  They're
not interested in spending any money on an upgrade, as
the box is doing exactly what they want: running RIP
internally, and taking Ethernet-in and Serial-out.

-David

 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com