From: Ben (bmunyao@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Sep 29 2007 - 14:43:14 ART
LOL
2000 = 1967 (Cisco's way???)
Ben
On 9/29/07, Joseph Brunner <joe@affirmedsystems.com> wrote:
>
> Does anyone else think IP SLA is a turd? (look at what's wrong with this
> picture)
>
>
>
> ip sla monitor 1
>
> type udpEcho dest-ipaddr 1.1.16.22 dest-port 2000 source-ipaddr 1.1.16.6
> source-port 2000
>
> timeout 6
>
> frequency 2
>
> ip sla monitor schedule 1 life forever start-time now
>
>
>
> *Sep 29 08:56:08.959: IP: tableid=0, s=1.1.16.6 (local), d=1.1.16.22
> (GigabitEthernet0/0), routed via RIB
>
> *Sep 29 08:56:08.959: IP: s=1.1.16.6 (local), d=1.1.16.22
> (GigabitEthernet0/0), len 80, sending
>
> *Sep 29 08:56:08.959: UDP src=2000, dst=1967
>
> *Sep 29 08:56:08.959: IP: tableid=0, s=1.1.16.6 (GigabitEthernet0/0),
> d=1.1.16.22 (GigabitEthernet0/0), routed via RIB
>
> *Sep 29 08:56:08.959: IP: s=1.1.16.6 (GigabitEthernet0/0), d=1.1.16.22
> (GigabitEthernet0/0), len 80, rcvd 3
>
> *Sep 29 08:56:08.959: UDP src=2000, dst=1967
>
>
>
>
>
> I think Cisco's R&D is choking on Watermelon seeds in the Watermelon juice
> in San Jose.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 06 2007 - 12:01:16 ART