thanks. From the rfc 1700, protocol number 4 and 94 are for ipip. How would
I know which is the one that juniper/cisco is referring to?
Is it the reason why cisco use "ipinip" to represent 4 and "nos" to
represent 94?
regards,
Jonathan.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Antonio Querubin" <tony@lava.net>
To: "Jonathan Tse" <jonathantse@pacific.net.sg>
Cc: <juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 11:22 AM
Subject: Re: KA9Q NOS protocol number?
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Jonathan Tse wrote:
>
> > Cisco ACL has a "nos" to represent KA9Q NOS protocol but not in Juniper.
Is
> > there anyone knows its equivalent protocol number? It seems KA9Q NOS is
not
> > RFC and documentation on the web is quite limited unless I have to read
thru
> > the source code. :(
> >
> > cisco#access-list 1 permit ?
> > <0-255> An IP protocol number
> > ahp Authentication Header Protocol
> > eigrp Cisco's EIGRP routing protocol
> > esp Encapsulation Security Payload
> > gre Cisco's GRE tunneling
> > icmp Internet Control Message Protocol
> > igmp Internet Gateway Message Protocol
> > igrp Cisco's IGRP routing protocol
> > ip Any Internet Protocol
> > ipinip IP in IP tunneling
> > nos KA9Q NOS compatible IP over IP tunneling
> > ospf OSPF routing protocol
> > pcp Payload Compression Protocol
> > pim Protocol Independent Multicast
> > tcp Transmission Control Protocol
> > udp User Datagram Protocol
>
> It was 94 if I recall correctly. At some point Phil Karn switched to the
> standard IP IP encapsulation (4) but many variants of NOS still
> maintained an option to use the older version number for compatibility
> with AMPRNet gateways that couldn't make the transition right away.
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 05 2002 - 10:42:40 EDT