[123291] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Cisco hardware question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Stefan)
Thu Mar 4 19:04:32 2010
In-Reply-To: <1267746851.16514.5.camel@ub-g-d2>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 18:02:54 -0600
From: Stefan <netfortius@gmail.com>
To: gordslater@ieee.org, Brielle Bruns <bruns@2mbit.com>, nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Take the S/Ns and run them over by Cisco.
On 3/4/10, gordon b slater <gordslater@ieee.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 16:46 -0700, Brielle Bruns wrote:
>
>> fsck is not just for failing hard drives. fsck is used any time you
>> want to check a disk (may it be ssd, optical, magnetic) for any kind of
>> errors or inconsistencies. It's a standard part of any UNIX toolkit.
>>
>> On Linux systems with ext2/3, you'll see lost+found, which is where
>> stuff ends up if it can't be connected to an actual file entry. Sounds
>> exactly like what those FSCK files are - DOS used to do this with
>> scandisk.
>>
>
> beat me to it by a minute or two :)
>
> I'd guess (from a *nix-yness background) that the appliance is set up to
> automatically fsck a disk if it's dirty - `dirtiness` can be caused by
> thing like unexpected power cut as well as nasty things like hardware
> troubles. Appliances are prone to "power pulls" as they are usually
> headless.
> Some "diskless" appliances don't even bother to check , somewhat
> dismayingly.
>
> Not sure what the exact fs is on those boxes - anyone happen to know? -
> but from experience, I wouldn't be worrying too much (though I'd be very
> curious of course).
>
> Gord
>
> --
> snort, snort, oink, oink
>
>
>
>
>
--
Sent from my mobile device
***Stefan Mititelu
http://twitter.com/netfortius
http://www.linkedin.com/in/netfortius
