One of the great things about having a blog is I can do whatever I want with it, this post is on learning IP subnetting and I have found a good video to go with it, so I am bumping it up to today and adding the IP subnetting video, one of the many training videos from Cisco, will and possibly some more info later.
If you’ve ever struggled to learn IP subnetting, here is a detailed bookmark for you. Essentially, subnets are smaller networks inside of a larger one, breaking up IP networks helps avoid wasting IP addresses and this little guide will make it seem easy. Wish I had this when I first started to learn networking and Cisco routers, would’ve made it much easier. Years later, I had a teacher give me some of the same advice and I thought, where have you been.
IP subnetting is a fundamental subject that’s critical for any IP network engineer to understand, yet students have traditionally had a difficult time grasping it. Over the years, I’ve watched students needlessly struggle through school and in practice when dealing with subnetting because it was never explained to them in an easy-to-understand way. I’ve helped countless individuals learn what subnetting is all about using my own graphical approach and calculator shortcuts, and I’ve put all that experience into this article. Source: Techrepublic
Check out this great quick reference from the article.
Cisco has posted a notice on three vulnerabilities they just patched concerning routers and switches running their Cisco IOS or Cisco IOS XR software, that could enable someone to craft an IP option Denial of Service (DoS) attack. You can view all of Cisco’s security advisories here Cisco Security Advisories and Notices. Here is a quote from the most dangerous flaw,
Cisco routers and switches running Cisco IOS or Cisco IOS XR software may be vulnerable to a remotely exploitable crafted IP option Denial of Service (DoS) attack. Exploitation of the vulnerability may potentially allow for arbitrary code execution. The vulnerability may be exploited after processing an Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) packet, Protocol Independent Multicast version 2 (PIMv2) packet, Pragmatic General Multicast (PGM) packet, or URL Rendezvous Directory (URD) packet containing a specific crafted IP option in the packet’s IP header. No other IP protocols are affected by this issue.
To determine the software running on a Cisco product, log in to the device and issue the show version command to display the system banner. Cisco IOS software will identify itself as “Internetwork Operating System Software” or simply “IOS”. On the next line of output, the image name will be displayed between parentheses, followed by “Version” and the IOS release name. Cisco IOS XR software will identify itself as “Cisco IOS XR Software” followed by “Version” and the version number. Other Cisco devices will not have the show version command or will give different output. Source: Cisco Security Advisory: Crafted IP Option Vulnerability
Sans Internet Storm Center has released an article describing all three,
Crafted TCP Packet can cause denial of service (cisco-sa-20070124-crafted-tcp)
A remotely-exploitable memory leak in the Cisco IOS software could lead to a denial of service condition. This vulnerability applies to much of the IOS 12.0, 12.1 and 12.2 code base.
Crafted IP Option vulnerability (cisco-sa-20070124-crafted-ip-option)
By sending certain ICMP, PIMv2, PGM or URD packets with a specific IP option set to a Cisco IOS or IOS XR device, an attacker could cause the device to reload or even execute arbitrary code. This applies to a wide variety of releases.
IPv6 Routing Header vulnerability (cisco-sa-20070124-IOS-IPv6)
Certain crafted IPv6 Type 0 routing headers could crash a device running IOS. Source: Cisco vulnerabilities
Cisco has released Applied Intelligence Response bulletins for each vulnerability, which could help you detect someone trying to exploit these vulnerabilities.
As Brian Krebs of Security Fix said, it’s time to reboot the Internet again,
Cisco Systems Inc., the company whose hardware routers are responsible for handling the majority of the world’s Internet traffic, today issued patches to fix at least three very serious security holes in its products. This is generally not something that the average user needs to worry about, but I’m blogging on it because the flaws do have the potential to cause some problems that Internet users could experience in a very real way (i.e. e-mail and Internet access temporarily goes bye-bye).
Most Internet service providers will stagger the installation of these patches so as not to disrupt customers’ online connectivity, but one of these flaws appears to be so easy to exploit that if the bad guys figure out how before ISP get around to patching then we could very likely see portions of the Internet go dark soon. source: Time to Reboot the Internet Again
Ah, such is the Internet, if it wasn’t for security vulnerabilities all we’d have left to talk about would be which platform is better, Windows, Linux or OS X.
I have been wondering why exactly Apple went ahead without an agreement with Cisco Systems and used the iPhone name for their new smart phone. They have been talking to Cisco about the name since 2001, so you know they have a plan with or without Cisco’s agreement. Could it be, they want Cisco to agree after they have already decided to use the name, as some sort of macho thing so everybody can see that Cisco gave in? I doubt it, but you never know, Steve Jobs has never cared who he took on in his past battles, so maybe he needs another notch for his belt. More likely it has to do with he fact that Cisco never REALLY tried to protect their copyright, since there are at least two other devices using the name and a couple more patent requests for it, if I am reading correctly. And, as they said in the keynote, they are the first company to use the iPhone name for an actual cell phone, Cisco’s is for a line of internet phones, and as one of the reasons for trademarks is to prevent consumer confusion, most probably would not be confused by both companies having an iPhone product, since they are certainly different.
Another tactic is what News.com called the McDefense strategy, where they have a family of trademarks, such as everything beginning with an i, iPhone, iPod, iMac, iTV, etc, etc. Which could explain some of the lawsuits they threatened recently to some iPod accessory makers.
Apple can also argue that it owns a “family” of trademarks related to the iPhone, said Craig Mende, a lawyer with trademark and copyright firm Fross Zelnick Lehrman & Zissu in New York. For example, the iPod, iTunes, iMac, iWork and iLife products all bear a strong association with Apple, so the company could argue that consumers would naturally associate the iPhone with Apple.
The most famous example of this strategy is used by McDonalds, which has successfully argued that any other company that attached “Mc” to their product, like a McPhone, is creating consumer confusion that the McPhone is a McDonald’s product. Even though you really shouldn’t eat a phone, consumers would automatically associate McDonald’s with anything using the “Mc” prefix, Mende said. Source: How Apple could fight Cisco
But, even in that case, just adding an “i” to something is not enough to give it a family grouping, and others are doing the same thing, Sony uses a technology called iLink, there is an iBoat Store, the Soundcast iCast and the Klipsch iGroove, to name a few. Plus, Cisco really hadn’t used the name until last year, when it actually changed the names of the Linksys CIT200 and the Linksys CIT310 to iPhones, and, personally, I don’t recall seeing an iPhone in the available options when we were installing a Cisco VOIP network last year. I will have to check and see if we still have the catalog, or maybe it was a PDF, that we used to look at the available phones.
There are many different ways Apple could get to use the iPhone, and, all of the buzz from his keynote will certainly help. Look at how much coverage they got from announcing the iPhone, you would think Jobs just turned water into wine, but such is the reaction to most Apple fanatics, not that it is bad, I wish I liked a company as well as people like Apple, but I don’t. If you ask the average person on the street who makes the iPhone they will say Apple more than likely, and if you ask who owns the trademark tot he iPhone? People like me and people who read my blog and other blogs will know who owns the trademark, but most people will say Apple does, more than likely, and if you tell them Cisco is making some iPhone products? They will probably think Cisco is infringing on Apple or that they are making “clone” iPhones, or knockoffs. Who will the likely winner be? Apple more than likely.
Added: Just saw this post, about how a company, Ocean Telecom Services, could possibly be a shell company who applied for a trademark, that sounds a LOT like the iPhone. The company also applied for the same patent in Australia as well.
C 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: handheld and mobile digital electronic devices for the sending and receiving of telephone calls, faxes, electronic mail, and other digital data; MP3 and other digital format audio players; handheld computers, personal digital assistants, electronic organizers, electronic notepads; magnetic data carriers; telephones, mobile phones, computer gaming machines, videophones, cameras; prerecorded computer programs for personal information management, database management software, electronic mail and messaging software, paging software, database synchronization software, computer programs for accessing, browsing and searching online databases, computer software and firmware, namely operating system programs, data synchronization programs, and application development tool programs for personal and handheld computers; electronic handheld units for the wireless receipt and/or transmission of data that enable the user to keep track of or manage personal information; software for the redirection of messages, Internet e-mail, and/or other data to one or more electronic handheld devices from a data store on or associated with a personal computer or a server; and software for the synchronization of data between a remote station or device and a fixed or remote station or device; computer hardware and software for providing integrated telephone communication with computerized global information networks
C 028. US 022 023 038 050. G & S: hand-held unit for playing electronic games Source: Apple vs. Cisco over iPhone
Here I have added links to may new iPhone videos and other iPhone news information.
Apparently, Apple doesn’t care about others trademarks, just their own. According to a blog post from Cisco, they did not want money from Apple for using the iPhone trademark, nor did they want royalties on the iPhone, or even an exchange of services, they wanted to work together, now and in the future, they hoped their products could interoperate and hoped to facilitate collaboration with Apple. But Apple said, this is the iPhone without striking a deal with the trademark holders, hence the lawsuit.
Cisco owns the iPhone trademark. We have since 2000, when we bought a company called Infogear Technology, which had developed a product that combined web access and telephone. Infogear?s registrations for the mark date to 1996, before iMacs and iPods were even glimmers in Apple’s eye. We shipped and/or supported that iPhone product for years. We have been shipping new, updated iPhone products since last spring, and had a formal launch late last year. Apple knows this; they approached us about the iPhone trademark as far back as 2001, and have approached us several times over the past year.
Fundamentally we wanted an open approach. We hoped our products could interoperate in the future. In our view, the network provides the basis to make this happen?it provides the foundation of innovation that allows converged devices to deliver the services that consumers want. Our goal was to take that to the next level by facilitating collaboration with Apple. And we wanted to make sure to differentiate the brands in a way that could work for both companies and not confuse people, since our products combine both web access and voice telephony. That’s it. Openness and clarity. Source: UPDATE on Cisco’s iPhone Trademark – Commentary from Mark Chandler, Cisco’s SVP and General Counsel, on Apple’s infringement of Cisco’s iPhone trademark.
He goes on to say, Apple discussed the patents pending on their new technologies, so he knows they value intellectual property, and he asked, if someone created a product and called it the iPod but said it was different because it used a different video format, how would Apple react? I think Apple will have to give in, especially since the Cisco iPhone had been registered for the trademark in 1996, about ten years ago. How long has the iPod been around?
Cisco has released a small statement about Apple’s release of the iPhone. It doesn’t give any specifics, but it does say they expect a signed agreement anyday from Apple to the terms they gave them to be able to use the iPhone name.
Given Apple’s numerous requests for permission to use Cisco’s iPhone trademark over the past several years and our extensive discussions with them recently, it is our belief that with their announcement today, Apple intends to agree to the final document and public statement that were distributed to them last night and that addressed a few remaining items. We expect to receive a signed agreement today. Source: Cisco
Wonder how much it is going to cost Apple?