Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!nih-csl!alw.nih.gov!young
From: young@alw.nih.gov (Jeff Young)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
Subject: Re: Administrative overhead of routing multiple protocols through cisco routers
Message-ID: <1527@nih-csl.nih.gov>
Date: 21 May 91 19:34:00 GMT
References: <9105211420.AA19528@mozart.unx.sas.com>
Sender: news@nih-csl.nih.gov
Reply-To: young@alw.nih.gov (Jeff Young)
Organization: National Inst. of Health
Lines: 28

In article <9105211420.AA19528@mozart.unx.sas.com>, snodwt@vms.sas.com ("Tilley, David W.           1909") writes:
|> 
|> 
|> We are running a variety of ciscos with ver 8.23 of cisco's software and
|> are routing TCP/IP, DECnet, Novell, and AppleTalk phase II. We had a lot of
|> problems with the AppleTalk routing to begin with (the router seemed to
|> lose/confuse AARP information for networks that used cable-ranges greater than
|> one - when this happened, it became impossible to communicate with servers
|> that had to be accessed through the router (ie...on a different physical
|> network)). However, there seems to be a patch available from cisco to solve
|> this cable-range problem, and since we applied it, we've had no more AppleTalk
|> problems.
|> 
|> 
|> 					-Dave Tilley
|> 					 Macintosh network support guy
|> 					 SAS Institute Inc.
|> 					 dave@vms.sas.com
|> 
|> 					 "Hello Central? Give me Dr. Jazz..."

I sent a report of a similar problem to cisco some time ago.  Either they hadn't identified this as a problem yet, or they didn't recognize my problem as the one that you have mentioned.  At any rate, would you reply with the location/name of the patch.

thank-you
-- 
___________	
	jy
	young@heart.dcrt.nih.gov