| Free online Cisco Catalyst Switch Lab I have started a Free Cisco Catalyst Switch Lab for everyone to use. No reservation or registration is required.
This is to help people train on Cisco devices. Logon and have fun!
telnet 72.205.54.70 49001
telnet 72.205.54.70 49002
telnet 72.205.54.70 49003
telnet 72.205.54.70 49004
For network topology and updates, go to »labswitch.blogspot.com. Let me know if you have any questions or problems. Thank you! |
|
 Wily_OnePremium
join:2002-11-24
San Jose, CA | Interesting and good timing - wrapping up my CCNA-4 class so then it'll be time to practice, study, and practice some more for the exam. |
|
| reply to lanswitcher
NIIIIIIIICE!!
Will have to check this out some more when I get some more time. Thanks for the link and effort!
Regards |
|
|
|
 EdrickI aspire to tell the story of a lifetimePremium
join:2004-09-11
Woburn, MA | reply to lanswitcher
I dont see this working out for long. |
|
| Some asshat will screw it up. You could use TACACS+ to prevent the use of some commands like WR and then have something reboot the boxes every day at 4am so they revert back to their original config.
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company. |
|
| oh yeah, I've had to recover a switch a few times. I will probably run something like TACAS on the Linux host. I'm not sure how that would work with the ser2net reverse telnet server. The users are not logging into the terminal server, and there is no network connection to the switches.
said by battleop:Some asshat will screw it up. You could use TACACS+ to prevent the use of some commands like WR and then have something reboot the boxes every day at 4am so they revert back to their original config.
|
|
| I've got enough equipment to setup a route lab
Couple of 7200's
and 4 2621xm's with serial cards with layer three switches.
I would be willing to setup this if anyone would be interested maybe we could put togather a free lab site for more than just switching |
|
cramer
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:7 | We don't really need a router lab as they can be simulated in software (packet tracer, gns3, etc.) Switches (currently) cannot be simulated. |
|
| said by cramer:We don't really need a router lab as they can be simulated in software (packet tracer, gns3, etc.) Switches (currently) cannot be simulated.
I'm still a firm believer of real world equipment being used to study on and train on. Nothing like hands on experience compared to a simulator in my opinion.
|
|
 TomS_Git-r-donePremium,MVM
join:2002-07-19
London, UK
kudos:4 | said by r2d2 :real world equipment Amen to that. I dunno what it is really, things like GNS never "did it for me." I like to have something sitting there that I can play with, change the topology with cables instead of mouse clicks, etc. I suppose the down side is that I cant have it running 24/7 because its noisy. :-P
Each to their own I suppose.
Im slowly re-building my lab up at home. Managed to pick up a 2821 from work that was destined for the trash. So now I have:
1x 2811
1x 2821
1x Juniper J2300
1x Juniper SRX100 (which is my broadband router)
Both of the Ciscos have an assortment of voice interface cards/modules.
I also spied a couple of 2800 series (a 2811 and either a 2821 or 2851, cant see the back) and a 2960 switch at a DC the other day which looks like theyve been pulled out and might have the same fate as the 2821 above, but belong to someone else so not sure if I could get hold of them (though I could ask the facility manager), but damn they would be awesome to get hold of as well...
But ideally I'd like to beef up the Juniper side of my lab before anything else, I just couldnt let the 2821 go to waste when I saw it.  |
|
cramer
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:7 | reply to r2d2
Oh I agree; I'm old school, too. A lab environment you're telnet'ing into is not really "hands on". In fact, you'd never know if it was actual hardware or not.
The big plus to virtual hardware is not have a ton of equipment to lug around, power, and cool. If you understand the software, specific configurations can be setup very quickly -- much faster than "now where did I leave that cable?" And switching between different setups is nearly instant. The main drawback is that it's only a simulation -- an approximation of reality; the real world is often very different. |
|
 tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ
kudos:1 | reply to TomS_
said by TomS_:Amen to that. I dunno what it is really, things like GNS never "did it for me." I like to have something sitting there that I can play with, change the topology with cables instead of mouse clicks, etc. I suppose the down side is that I cant have it running 24/7 because its noisy. :-P
i never liked gns3 until i finally learned how to use it. the curve is slightly steeper than i would have expected, but once you learn how to make a topology work out for you, its actually pretty simple. i have a base config that i apply to all of my devices upon loading, then i just run the correct ios for my installation and i crank it out.
i had a 9 router topology running on my macbook air (i7 @ 1.8ghz, 4gig ram) without much trouble (though the cpu was running about 70% steady). it was a 3 router collapsed p/pe triangle running ospf, ldp, and rsvp-te, and full ibgp mesh. each p/pe had two routers connected, over which some sort of routing occured into the vrf (one set was static, one ospf redisty into mpbgp, one was pure bgp). everything ran well on 3725s running 12.4(15)t or so.
the only downside is the emulation for the routers is slightly older, but as long as you can find an ios version that supports the control-plane bits that you need, you should have a pretty good run at things.
my two bits.
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." |
|
sk1939Premium
join:2010-10-23
Washington, DC
kudos:9 Reviews:
 ·T-Mobile US
| reply to TomS_
The problem is the Juniper stuff is expensive. I'm working on building out my lab as well, I'm set for switching, although I could do with another 3750.
My lab:
1 x 3750-24-PoE
1 x 2960G
1 x 2960
1 x 2950-48-EI
1 x 3550-48-EI
1 x 4006 (Supervisor II)
1 x 4506-E (Supervisor 6)[on loan]
Short on the router side though, only have a single ISR (2811), most everything else is a couple generations out of date (1720 for example). |
|
| reply to r2d2
r2, message me sometime if you want to setup a tunnel or something
interconnected lab sites could be interesting...
said by r2d2 :I've got enough equipment to setup a route lab
Couple of 7200's
and 4 2621xm's with serial cards with layer three switches.
I would be willing to setup this if anyone would be interested maybe we could put togather a free lab site for more than just switching
|
|
aryobaPremium,MVM
join:2002-08-22
kudos:3 | reply to sk1939
said by sk1939:The problem is the Juniper stuff is expensive.
Those old Netscreen NS series are rock-bottom cheap now days. Even the SSG series are already cheap. Yes, they are running ScreenOS which is being phased out. But still it is a very decent box compared to ASA or PIX Firewall.
The J series (running JUNOS) are probably about the same price as ASA or 1900 series. However I rather get SRX series since with SRX series you can do a lot of things; routing, switching, firewall, routing instances (similar to ASA/PIX Multiple Context), virtualization, and much more. If you like to see a firewall having multiple local BGP AS where each maintains its own routing table in addition to do Layer-2 trunking and VLAN, SRX is the way to go |
|
aryobaPremium,MVM
join:2002-08-22
kudos:3 | reply to tubbynet
For those who consider running JUNOS on GNS3
»blog.gns3.net/2009/10/olive-juniper/ |
|
| reply to lanswitcher
lan,
I've sent you an instant message look foward to hearing from you. |
|
tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ
kudos:1 | reply to aryoba
i've been running an olive before gns3 made it cool 
q.
--
"...if I in my north room dance naked, grotesquely before my mirror waving my shirt round my head and singing softly to myself..." |
|
sk1939Premium
join:2010-10-23
Washington, DC
kudos:9 Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
| reply to aryoba
I have an NS5GT, but as you said ScreenOS is being phased out, which is what has kept be from buying an SSG5.
Still rather pricey considering the age of some of the equipment. The SRX series is nice, although if I do recall, the SRX100 is somewhat limited in features. |
|
aryobaPremium,MVM
join:2002-08-22
kudos:3 | said by sk1939:I have an NS5GT, but as you said ScreenOS is being phased out, which is what has kept be from buying an SSG5.
I see ScreenOS as Cisco alternative which is a nice refresh and also opens your eye into possibilities especially when you have been dealing with Cisco for "too long". With "Cisco mindset", firewall like ASA or PIX is simply firewall. You could never imagine doing BGP on firewall which Juniper Netscreen, SSG, and SRX series support.
Further with the Netscreen and SSG series, the concept of virtual router (similar to ASA/PIX Multiple Context) is by default and is something you have to use. With each virtual router, there will be separate routing table that can run its own routing protocol (i.e. OSPF and BGP).
With ASA or PIX, Multiple Context is not on by default (similar to SRX series where virtual router is not on by default). When the ASA or PIX starts to use Multiple Context, certain features are no longer supported such as inability to run routing protocol in its individual context, while Netsceen and SSG series have no such constraints.
said by sk1939:Still rather pricey considering the age of some of the equipment.
I'm guessing it is because ScreenOS supports more features than PIX or ASA OS?
said by sk1939:The SRX series is nice, although if I do recall, the SRX100 is somewhat limited in features.
For most organizations, home network, and lab purposes; SRX 100 is very decent. By default (depending on which JUNOS version it is running); SRX 100 supports (to name a few) virtual routers and capability of running routing protocols, firewall, stateful inspection in each virtual router in addition to basic features such as switching, VLAN, trunking, access port, TACACS/RADIUS authentication, and custom protocol inspection.
According to Juniper documentation, SRX 100 also support L3VPN (VRF), L2VPN, and virtualization. I'm unsure if these features come by default or if the features come with special license. Nevertheless, these features are blowing your mind since in Cisco world, you need something like ASR series to support L2VPN.
Another good point with SRX series as firewall is that it can handle more work compared to ASA. We had a test between comparable SRX series and ASA (I think it was between SRX 650 and ASA 5540). Heavy inspection put ASA a significant load on the CPU while the SRX did not even blink so then we chose the SRX 650 as production firewall. |
|
