Can VC types in a VPLS different? Say in a single VPLS instance (a VFI in cisco world), can some VC be type 4, others be type 5? Is this allowed/disallowed by some RFC?
帮手参考: 以下哪些econ field 最容易又最少用到programming? trying to choose an easy econ field of study with least programming work. thanks!! 我的学校有的选择fields 是: Econometrics International Economics Economic Development Labor Economics Financial Economics Mathematical Economics Game Theory Monetary Economics Industrial Organization Public Economics 多谢
帮手参考: 以下哪些econ field 最容易又最少用到programming? trying to choose an easy econ field of study with least programming work. thanks!! 我的学校有的选择fields 是: Econometrics International Economics Economic Development Labor Economics Financial Economics Mathematical Economics Game Theory Monetary Economics Industrial Organization Public Economics 多谢
【在 x*0 的大作中提到】 : 帮手参考: 以下哪些econ field 最容易又最少用到programming? : trying to choose an easy econ field of study with least programming work. : thanks!! : 我的学校有的选择fields 是: : Econometrics : International Economics : Economic Development : Labor Economics : Financial Economics : Mathematical Economics
l*d
14 楼
485表最好和出生公证或护照上的出生地保持一致
T*o
15 楼
That expensive? I saw in post which dated 2007 said it worth 180 at that time. So suppose double to 400 maybe? I will upload some pictures tonight.
【在 m********e 的大作中提到】 : maybe 1000 RMB, I guess. : 中圆 has too many counterfeits...
g*o
16 楼
对啊,这三角梅拍的真美啊,一改在我心中的形象
d*i
17 楼
Let me use the cisco configuration as an example to elaborate my question: if I have: l2 vfi VFI man vpn id 1111 neighbor 1.1.1.2 pw-class vc4 neighbor 1.1.1.3 pw-class vc5 pseudowire-class vc4 encap mpls interworking vlan pseudowire-class vc5 encap mpls The pw class vc4 will ensure the VC to 1.1.1.2 type 4, while pw class vc5 will generally make VC to 1.1.1.3 type 5. Currently Cisco routers does not support the above configuration because it does not support interworking vlan for vpls yet, but if that is supported, does it violate any RFC? Thanks.
【在 s*****g 的大作中提到】 : One instance corresponds to one VC id, within the same VCid, circuit type : must match, if you are asking one peer, different VC type, then it is OK.
p*t
18 楼
IO也要用很多Programing。economics development应该用的不多吧
【在 t*******i 的大作中提到】 : I.O. : P.E. : : 帮手参考: 以下哪些econ field 最容易又最少用到programming? : trying to choose an easy econ field of study with least programming work. : thanks!! : 我的学校有的选择fields 是: : Econometrics : International Economics : Economic Development
n*s
19 楼
在140申请的时候不小心填成了B; 现在准备485,看了户口本,才发现上面写的是A,我是应该跟140保持一致呢,还是跟 户口本上的信息保持一致呢? 或者在出生证明上把A和B都带上,说A是town, B是city, 出生在是A town, B city?
RFC probably does not care about this situation, vendor should implement in a way that if VC-type mis-matches, it will automatically adjust one side VC- type in order to bring up the VC.
sure we can configure other PEs in a way that brings up VC, and we can configure in the way one VC type 4, one VC type 5 and both VCs are up. So it is not a violation to any RFC? It will certainly add more complexity for vendor's products though.
in VC-
【在 s*****g 的大作中提到】 : RFC probably does not care about this situation, vendor should implement in : a way that if VC-type mis-matches, it will automatically adjust one side VC- : type in order to bring up the VC.
D*n
27 楼
I.O. without programming, no job. I.O, with programming, lots of jobs.
【在 t*******i 的大作中提到】 : I.O. : P.E. : : 帮手参考: 以下哪些econ field 最容易又最少用到programming? : trying to choose an easy econ field of study with least programming work. : thanks!! : 我的学校有的选择fields 是: : Econometrics : International Economics : Economic Development
【在 s*****g 的大作中提到】 : RFC probably does not care about this situation, vendor should implement in : a way that if VC-type mis-matches, it will automatically adjust one side VC- : type in order to bring up the VC.
j*n
31 楼
economics history
g*5
32 楼
who care? they just want know you from mainland china.
I don't see why it cannot, but it'll depend on the vendor implementations ...
【在 d****i 的大作中提到】 : Can VC types in a VPLS different? Say in a single VPLS instance (a VFI in : cisco world), can some VC be type 4, : others be type 5? Is this allowed/disallowed by some RFC?
T*m
41 楼
菊花好看!我也喜欢这样长的矮的。
【在 H****H 的大作中提到】 : 我倒是偶尔来潜水围观,常看到你咧
z*r
42 楼
agree
in VC-
【在 s*****g 的大作中提到】 : RFC probably does not care about this situation, vendor should implement in : a way that if VC-type mis-matches, it will automatically adjust one side VC- : type in order to bring up the VC.