[59687] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Fixed IOS datestamps?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Matthew Kaufman)
Thu Jul 17 15:03:48 2003
From: "Matthew Kaufman" <matthew@eeph.com>
To: "'Scott Call'" <scall@devolution.com>, <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 12:00:22 -0700
In-Reply-To: <3F16F056.2010404@devolution.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
I had the same problem, with no resolution from any of my contacts yet
either (perhaps they're busy?)... In my case, 12.2(14)S is a recommended
option for 7200s (but built a while back), but that leaves me wondering
about 12.2(14)S2 and 12.2(14)S3 (the last of which was at least built
recently).
Perhaps someone on the list has already compiled a quick "here's a good =
set
of releases for ISPs" list that covers the obvious router choices?
I'm also having trouble deciphering whether or not there's an "old =
enough"
release that isn't affected by the bug for 2511 and 2611, since the bug =
tool
data isn't the same as the vulnerability announcement list.
Matthew Kaufman
matthew@eeph.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On=20
> Behalf Of Scott Call
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 11:52 AM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Fixed IOS datestamps?
>=20
>=20
>=20
> I started collecting the new IOS files for tonight's reboot of the=20
> Internet, and I had a quick question.
>=20
> The datestamps on a lot of the maintainence releases are=20
> months old, and=20
> I just want to make sure I'm getting the right stuff, as they=20
> say, so we=20
> don't have to do this dance again tomorrow.
>=20
> For example, 12.0S users are recommended to go to 12.0(25)S, which at=20
> least for the GSR is dated April 14, 2003.
>=20
> Do I have the right build of 12.0(25)S or will there be one=20
> with a date=20
> closer to the revelation of the exploit showing up on the=20
> cisco FTP site?
>=20
> Thanks
> -Scott
>=20
