[123292] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Cisco hardware question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Ricky Beam)
Thu Mar 4 19:17:02 2010
To: "Kaveh ." <afx66@hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2010 19:16:34 -0500
From: "Ricky Beam" <jfbeam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <SNT140-w56593771EB5564D397D466B0390@phx.gbl>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 18:16:01 -0500, Kaveh . <afx66@hotmail.com> wrote:
> A) Pre-existing configs: What Tim and Joe mentioned is apparently
> correct. I was on phone with a few Cisco tech-reps earlier today and
> they told me that since version 8.2, they have been shipping ASAs with a
> default configuration, which explains the existence of private IP
> addresses on the inside interface, etc ... .
The Pix 501 was like that too. It was usable "out of the box".
...
> I could not find much info on these files, but a simple Google search
> indicates that these files may be 'recovery files' of Disks operating
> under Unix/Linux/BSD/etc /... kernel, indicating a dying hard drive.
> That would be enough to freak me out! Anyone can confirm this?
It's not a "disk", but a CF (256M in your case.) It's a DOS FAT
filesystem. The underlying linux OS runs dosfsck on every boot. There
are *lots* of reasons why it would find things to recover. It's not
necessarily an indication of Badness(tm).
> C) SmarNet issue: I am a little confused on this. Since this purchase
> was for NEW equipment, and the devices were shipped by Cisco (at least
> that is what I read on the box; a Cisco warehouse in TX)...
Not necessarily. I've seen a lot of boxes that appear to have come
"direct" from Cisco, however, I know they came from a wholesaler's
warehouse. (only one came direct from Cisco. from the factory in Malaysia.)
