Foundry Old Switch vs Old Cisco one

Dears,

I have this old foundry switch in the warehouse, I have no experience in Foundry, i wonder if this switch can be upgraded to a newer OS that will support advanced features or shall i consider it dead,

I want to mainly use it for one customer that wants caching, its L4 i guess and i have an old NetApp caching server that will save the customer 10MBs i guess.

telnet@foundry-switch#sh ver
SW: Version 07.3.04T12 Copyright © 1996-1999 Foundry Networks, Inc.
Compiled on Mar 07 2002 at 11:46:40 labeled as SLB07304
HW: ServerIron Switch, serial number 10ac46
400 MHz Power PC processor 740 (revision 8) with 32756K bytes of DRAM
16 100BaseT interfaces with Level 1 Transceiver LXT975
2 GIGA Fiber uplink interfaces, SX
256 KB PRAM and 82048 CAM entries for DMA 1, version 0807
256 KB PRAM and 8
2048 CAM entries for DMA 2, version 0807
256 KB PRAM and 41024 CAM entries for DMA 4, version 0104, SEEQ GIGA MAC 8101
256 KB PRAM and 4
1024 CAM entries for DMA 5, version 0104, SEEQ GIGA MAC 8101
128 KB boot flash memory
4096 KB code flash memory
2048 KB BRAM, BM version 02
128 KB QRAM
512 KB SRAM
Octal System, Maximum Code Image Size Supported: 1965568 (0x001dfe00)
The system uptime is 2 days 5 hours 24 minutes 5 seconds
The system : started=cold start

Please redirect me to technical documentation/OS upgrade webpages for this, if there is any.

If it wont fit, i’ll have to buy a new Cisco one perhaps.

"Kim Onnel" <karim.adel@gmail.com> writes:

I have this old foundry switch in the warehouse, I have no experience in
Foundry, i wonder if this switch can be upgraded to a newer OS that will
support advanced features or shall i consider it dead,

What advanced features? It's a L4 switch with fixed ports. There's
really not much to add or remove.

I want to mainly use it for one customer that wants caching, its L4 i guess
and i have an old NetApp caching server that will save the customer 10MBs i
guess.

It should be able to do this without any upgrades at all. But I guess
you'd want a service contract on it anyway...

telnet@foundry-switch#sh ver
SW: Version 07.3.04T12 Copyright (c) 1996-1999 Foundry Networks, Inc.
     Compiled on Mar 07 2002 at 11:46:40 labeled as SLB07304
HW: ServerIron Switch, serial number 10ac46
400 MHz Power PC processor 740 (revision 8) with 32756K bytes of DRAM
  16 100BaseT interfaces with Level 1 Transceiver LXT975
   2 GIGA Fiber uplink interfaces, SX

As it says, this is a 16-port ServerIron XL with a 2-port SX
gig-module. It runs a pretty early version of the layer 3 enabled
code for SIs. Should be OK, I guess.

Documentation can be found at
http://www.foundrynet.com/services/documentation/index.html#SI
and software on
http://www.foundrynet.com/services/support/index.html
(software download requires a service contract)

Bjørn

Got this forwarded to me by an associate - seems he tried the usual channels and is having no luck. I suppose there are professional phishermen out there but it sure would be nice to cut to the Chase on this one. Heh ... get it ... Chase?

--- phish report

We got a bunch of e-mails this morning, purporting to be from Chase.com; when you click the link in the message, though, you go to the following site;

hhhttp://cpe-24-221-82-147.mi.sprintbbd.net:81/colappmgr/colportal/prospect.php?_n fpb=change_form

It's been running since about 7 AM Central time.

I've already contacted Chase, as well as Sprint Broadband, but they either a)don't care, or b)don't have a clue what to do. Is there any way of getting in touch with SOMEONE who can shut this guy down? If my 70 year old Mom got a message like this, she'd be owned in a matter of minutes - it pisses me off that people could be this evil.

http://castlecops.com/pirt

Hey United guys: chase.us? The registrar is appears absent again. Maybe you slam dunk it?
This Chase phish is really getting out of hand. I'm getting them daily from 2 to 5 times
in the last week.

They are being very resilient on the page source. They're everywhere.

Phish source:

http://www.fugawi.net/~hannigan/chasephish.txt

Spam:

http://www.fugawi.net/~hannigan/chasespam.txt

NS:

Non-authoritative answer:
chase.us nameserver = authns.lax.mysite.com.
chase.us nameserver = authns.nyc.mysite.com.
chase.us nameserver = authns.iad.mysite.com.

Authoritative answers can be found from:
authns.iad.mysite.com internet address = 64.136.35.146
authns.lax.mysite.com internet address = 64.136.28.28
authns.nyc.mysite.com internet address = 64.136.20.28

-M<

Bah, someone else mentioned them just recently. From my point of view, all they seem to do is scattershot any addresses they can find that's even remotely related.

Won't be too useful when they get their mail blocked at various places...

Given the fact that the type of places that the PIRT people need to notify
are the kind of places that also have non-functional abuse@ addresses,
do you have an actual *better* suggestion?

To *try* the *relevant* abuse@ addresses before scattershotting?

I'm talking about ME receiving a complaint from them about a Yahoo! issue... that's how bad it is.
(No, I don't work for Yahoo!, my employer does have a relationship with them, but we don't provide them IP connectivity).

Would this be the same Yahoo! that was quoted here just a few days ago as
saying that some spam wasn't theirs, by virtue of it apparently having
actually started at a business partner that was chummy enough to have an
RFC1918 address routable from Yahoo's mail server?