I have spent the last few days reading posts about getting IOS for certian types of Cisco hardware, and I think that I have a good idea on what I need but would like some clarity.
A few days ago my employer was getting rid of a lot of cisco hardware including 2 4006 switches several routers and a 6500 series swtich and several PIX firewalls. I am looking to set up a small cisco lab at home to learn on. Before I recieved the hardware the IOS was wiped off of everything but one of the routers. I would like to get everything up and working but would like to know what all is involved in gettting IOS's for such a wide array of hardware.
Regretably, to do it completely legally, you have to "relicense" the various OS's.
formatting link
The parts number you might need appear to include:
for 4006: LLC4006-EMS-LIC LLC4KSUP* (followed by K9 if you want 3DES)
for 6500: LLC6KSUP* (followed by a code that corresponds roughly to release train; e.g., LLC6SUP12ZV) LLC6X09-EMS-LIC (replace 9 with 6 for 6506, replace 6X09 with 6513 for that)
For PIX:
LL-PIX-*-SW-* (replace first * with model number, replace second with software license type; e.g., LL-PIX-501-SW-50, LL-PIX-535-SW-UR)
The EMS-LIC are for the RMON agent. Prices vary wildly, from $US1500 to $US6500 for the LLC6X09-EMS-LIC.
Sample prices: LL-PIX-515-SW-R: about $US700 LL-PIX-515-SW-UR: about $US3500 - $US5500
In article , snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote: Does Cisco make anything like Microsoft Express
Sorry, No. The "IP Feature Set" is the lowest end for most devices (though some, such as the 83x series, start with IP/Firewall). For lower-end devices, the IP Feature Set used to be a nominal $US15. Unfortunately, those low prices never applied to the PIX or the
6500 series.
Perhaps you can arrange to have your employer "lend" you the devices instead of giving them to you. As long as they belong to your employer, your employer still has the license right; if necessary, your employer could re-download the software from Cisco.
In my opinion, it is perfectly valid for an employer to deploy old equipment as training equipment. As long as your employer doesn't mind carrying them on the inventory list (which, unfortunately, can be a pain... e.g., while it remains on the books, it might have to be depreciated, whereas in disposing of it the remaining value can be "written off".)
At the place I work, the funds for permanent employees come from two sources: licensing of patents, and "fee-for-service". [We also get a fair bit of grant money, but often that cannot be used to pay -existing- employees.]
Most of our fee-for-service customers insist on confidentiality of the results -- because they intend to use the results to further their business advantage.
Your claim that "companies need to realize the educational usage will help them in the long run" is essentially an incitement to have people steal our patents (and pre-patented technology) and steal and distribute our confidential reports, under the rationale that them doing so would "help us" in the long run.
It might perhaps be argued that the dissemination of techncial and scientific information "floats all boats higher", but the
*practical* impact would be that we'd have to downsize at least
40% if your view of what would "help us" in the long run were to take hold.
A few thousand dollars in software licenses might seem unimportant and unnecessary to you, but to us it is the difference of being able to hold on to a good worker for a couple of extra months. For the five person sub-group that I work in, the entire operational budget for the year is $US6300 -- and that has to cover all of our travel, training, conference attendance fees, and conference living expenses; along with replacement monitors, photocopy fees, pens and staples, and our share of the cost of the reams of paper for printing and photocopying.
One sale more or less might not be important to -you-, but it is important to -us-.
[I do not work for Cisco, but the principle you espouse remains the same.]
I understand where you are coming from but my employer give millions of dollars of software away to universities every year in hopes that those same students when they get in the real world will continue to want to use the platform that they were taught on. It becomes a trade off in the end.
You can download IOS for free with a CCO account. Every employee of a Telco or ISP (with Cisco support contracts) have logins. Support contracts you can get for about $800+ per year, but you will need to buy at least one router through a Cisco Channel Partner. You dont have to renew it after the first year. Once you have that, you can log TAC support cases for softweare (and hardware replacement if you have that level of service) and full access to the IOS library. I suggest asking around for someone you know locally to download am image for you lab. Cheers, Jason
It's nice that they can afford to do that for long term gain, but that doesn't excuse Randal's "companies need to be taught a lesson" attitude. Educational give-aways are a financial model that works for -your- employer, but it that doesn't mean it would work for -all- organizations.
My employer has gone through a decade of "do more with less". There isn't any fat left -- not even enough to manage an educational donation program. Our financing has been cut, and unless some-one manages a political coup, odds are that within weeks 200 or more people will be laid off. And that's
-before- the budget cuts likely to be imposed by the new administration. 10% job cuts within six months is plausible.
But, hey, Randal says it's okay to rip off organizations like ours, that it would be good for us in the long run. I wonder how many of our laid-off employees his consulting firm would be interested in hiring?
It isn't free: you have to have a support contract.
Contracts with download privileges have to be tied to specific devices; you don't get download privs just because you work for an organization that has some contract for something.
Less than $150 per year for a PIX 501 contract that gives access to the same download area used by IOS.
According to the Cisco download page, every download is logged, and Cisco may cross-check to be sure you are only downloading images that your contract entitles you to. The download agreement is clear that you are not permitted to download software for devices you do not have an active support contract on. You also are not permitted to transfer (e.g., give) a copy of the software to anyone else.
About the only exception to all of this is that the personal accounts of certified CCIE are permitted to download a wide variey of image.
It is true that all organizations can't afford to give away educational software, many small software companies can't. But Cisco is not a small business, they are one of the world largest networking companies, and I am sure that they could afford to have some program where it is possible for one to get educational software.
I didn't say companies need to be taught a lesson. I'm saying it is a stupid business decision to try and charge someone who just wants to learn your software tens of thousands of dollars.
And for people whining about their poor companies trying to make money off only software licensing - stop it. Nobody cares. Get a better job because it is obvious your management is inept. You can make money off license-only software. But you have to create a smarter model.
But hey, Randal didn't say that (again). Think for a minute. What happened to SGI? They didn't give a crap about people wanting to learn how to use their OS. Everyone pays the same, whether you are commercial or educational. What happened to them?
I hate to invoke the name of the evil beast, but even Microsoft offers a logical scale along these lines. I hear they're doing well.
They're a big company, so it doesn't matter if you cheat them?
I make my living from programming and systems and network administration. I'm paid for my creative application of my knowledge and analytical skills. It could reasonably be said that I am "rich" in those things. By the combination of your logic and Randal's logic, it would be acceptable to pilfer some of my labour or knowledge.
What you said, right after suggesting ebay and the like, was:
Please -- no legal flames. Companies need to realize the educational usage will help them in the long run.
You suggested something that you obviously knew was not permitted within the contract terms, and then indicate that you don't want to listen to legal arguments. You -immediately- (not in the next paragraph, for example) follow that by saying that companies "need" to realize something.
It seems to me that the only reasonable interpretation of your words in context is you consider that violating the contract terms is acceptable because doing so will help the company realize that educational usage is a long-term benefit.
The management of the organization I work for isn't inept: they are doing a good job under the legal and political constraints they are under.
Looks like you did not happen to catch the nuances the first time around. The organization I work for has a number of constraints that it has to satisfy, and cannot raise money in the usual ways; in fact, a new law has to be passed every year to permit us to keep going.
SGI's educational discount varied by country, but last time I checked it was -usually- about 60%, and students at any official degree-granting institution were eligable for the educational pricing. The price of their OS for their desktop machines was also much lower than the price of their OS for their servers. There was also a "developer's program" that offered the OS and official compilers for a fairly low price to anyone who could present a reasonable plan showing that they were going to try to write and distribute IRIX software.
What SGI never did offer was "budget" or "Lite" or "hobbiest" pricing.
There is no simple answer to how they reached their present state. What is clear, though, is that going for a free OS (Linux) did not save them. Commercial Unix isn't doing well from -any- company (unless you count Mac OS X.)
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.