From: Mark, Detrick (mdetrick@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Jun 21 1999 - 13:25:22 GMT-3
Derek,
I worked on this over the weekend. I have a much better understanding of
this now...
In J Doyle's book it states that you can not go from p-to-p to p-to-m on
clns because depending on the interface type (p-to-p or p-to-m) it sends
different types of hello packets which are not compatible. This can be
verified by doing a debug packet. If a p-to-p interface receives a p-to-m
hellos it will not form an adjacency and vice-versa.
I used p-to-m interfaces all around on my test. I used "fram map clns
statements" and I forced the vertex to be the DR. I was able to get routes
between the spokes and vertex but not between the spokes. I tried
everything to get the routes to go from one spoke to another. It looks like
a split-horizon type of situation, but there are no commands to turn on/off
split-horizon for IS-IS and I don't think split-horizon applies to LS
routing protocols. What was strange to me was that the LSDB was identical
on all three routers, why then was the route table missing routes? So, I
guess I was half right. I couldn't figure it out and after a day's work I
gave up.
Mark Detrick
DSL Business Unit
Cisco Systems
2569 McCabe Way
Irvine, CA 92614
----- Original Message -----
From: Derek Fage <DerekF@itexjsy.com>
To: Derek Fage <DerekF@itexjsy.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 19, 1999 2:22 AM
Subject: RE: ISIS Routing issues
> Thanks Mark,
>
> With debug on I do not see any encaps failures (and I can see the CLNS
> packets going out over the F/R).
>
> I was just interested in why I could not get the mulitipoint interface
> talking to the point-to-point interface. With OSPF you can either change
the
> network types or adjust the timers, but this does not seem to be an
option.
>
> I think I'll leave it for now, I know I can get physical to physical,
p-to-p
> to p-to-p, and p-to-p to physical working, and apparentyle it is possible
to
> get multipoint-to-multipoint from what you say.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Derek...
>
> PS - why did Cisco change the naming of point-to-multipoint to just
> multipoint ?
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mark, Detrick [SMTP:mdetrick@cisco.com]
> > Sent: 19 June 1999 02:26
> > To: Derek Fage; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Re: ISIS Routing issues
> >
> > First, this IS absolutely possible. I have done it successfully.
> >
> > Second, you said it yourself: "R2 is a point-to-point interface, and
you
> > cannot use a F/R map statement on this." That is why you must use
p-to-m
> > int on all participating routers that are both the hub and the spokes!
> > You
> > MUST have the map statements on the hub and the spokes for this to work.
> >
> > I wiped out my configs that had this to move on to other things. If I
get
> > time this weekend I will set it up again and send the configs.
> >
> > Just out of curiosity... when you do debugs of the packets (check both
> > sides) see if you get any encapsulation failure messages for the CLNS
> > packets. Encapsulation failure messages mean that the router can't
> > resolve
> > the information neccessary to send the packet. This information is
> > usually
> > contained in the map statement.
> >
> > Mark Detrick
> > DSL Business Unit
> > Cisco Systems
> > 2569 McCabe Way
> > Irvine, CA 92614
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Derek Fage <DerekF@itexjsy.com>
> > To: 'Mark, Detrick' <mdetrick@cisco.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Friday, June 18, 1999 3:37 PM
> > Subject: RE: ISIS Routing issues
> >
> >
> > > Mark,
> > >
> > > I' fairly sure that there must be an issue with multipoint f/r
> > interfaces,
> > > that cannot be resolved like OSPF by using the ip ospf network
> > equivalent
> > > (there isn't one).
> > >
> > > R1 S01. is multipoint whereas R2 S0.1 is point-to-point. I can see
where
> > the
> > > issue would be with OSPF, but you do not seem to be able to change the
> > > interface characteristics with ISIS. I'm not sure if you could change
> > all
> > of
> > > the timers, but I do not think that would work.
> > >
> > > The really strange thing is that R2 sees the adjacency as Up, whereas
R1
> > > never sees it getting passed Init. I have debugged F/R packets to
ensure
> > > that it is not an F/R map issue, and it does not appear to be.
> > >
> > > R2 is a point-to-point interface, and you cannot use a F/R map
statement
> > on
> > > this. You just use a F/r intf-dcli statement. If you notice, R1's
> > > point-to-point interface works fine with R3's physical F/R interface
> > (with
> > > frame map clns statements in their). It's certainly starting to look
> > like
> > it
> > > is not possible to get an F/R multipoint interface to tal to a
> > > point-to-point (or phyical interface). Without the f/r map statement
on
> > the
> > > physical interface of R3 I was getting errors when I did debug f/r
> > packet.
> > >
> > > Derek...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Mark, Detrick [SMTP:mdetrick@cisco.com]
> > > > Sent: 18 June 1999 17:49
> > > > To: Derek Fage; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > Subject: Re: ISIS Routing issues
> > > >
> > > > Looking at it more closely,
> > > >
> > > > I noticed that your R1 int s0.1 is a multipoint and the router on
the
> > > > other
> > > > side is R2 int s0.1 and it is point-to-point. When setting up this
> > type
> > > > of
> > > > network the serial interfaces on all sides of a p-to-m should be set
> > to
> > > > multipoint. When both sides are set this way the routing
> > characteristics
> > > > will be consistent among all participating routers. This is
probably
> > not
> > > > your problem, however.
> > > >
> > > > On router R2, I don't see the frame map clns statement.
> > > > R1(hub)/R2(spoke)/?(spoke) are point-to-multipoint. Participating
> > routers
> > > > based on the subnet of the int. It appears that there is only one
> > spoke
> > > > at
> > > > this time.
> > > >
> > > > On router R3, there is a frame map clns statement and I don't think
> > you
> > > > need
> > > > one there. R3/R1 are point-to-point FR right?
> > > >
> > > > Mark Detrick
> > > > DSL Business Unit
> > > > Cisco Systems
> > > > 2569 McCabe Way
> > > > Irvine, CA 92614
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Derek Fage <DerekF@itexjsy.com>
> > > > To: 'Mark, Detrick' <mdetrick@cisco.com>; Derek Fage
> > <DerekF@itexjsy.com>;
> > > > <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > Sent: Friday, June 18, 1999 9:18 AM
> > > > Subject: RE: ISIS Routing issues
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > If you look at the configs, I have got the map statements in, but
it
> > > > still
> > > > > does not work.
> > > > >
> > > > > Derek...
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Mark, Detrick [SMTP:mdetrick@cisco.com]
> > > > > > Sent: 18 June 1999 17:17
> > > > > > To: Derek Fage; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > > > Subject: Re: ISIS Routing issues
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have read Jeff Doyle's book and he makes a statement that
IS-IS
> > > > (really
> > > > > > CLNS) can't be done over a point-to-multipoint interface.
> > However,
> > he
> > > > is
> > > > > > not correct. What will make it work are map statements.
Instead
> > of
> > > > > > mapping
> > > > > > IP addresses, map the CLNS address to the DLCI.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Mark Detrick
> > > > > > DSL Business Unit
> > > > > > Cisco Systems
> > > > > > 2569 McCabe Way
> > > > > > Irvine, CA 92614
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: Derek Fage <DerekF@itexjsy.com>
> > > > > > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, June 18, 1999 6:58 AM
> > > > > > Subject: ISIS Routing issues
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi there,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm now playing with IS-IS routing for IP in my lab
(attempting
> > to
> > > > > > replace
> > > > > > > an OSPF configuration).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The links are a mixture of ethernet and serial (Frame Relay).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have no problems with ethernet links, F/R physical or
> > > > point-to-point
> > > > > > > links, but I do not seem to be able to get a link between a
F/R
> > > > > > > point-to-point link on one router to form an adjacency with an
> > F/R
> > > > > > > multipoint link on another router.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On the point-to-point link, the adjacency appears to form
(show
> > clns
> > > > > > neigh
> > > > > > > displays the remote router as being Up), but on the multipoint
> > > > router
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > clns neigh seems to stay in Init state.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I cannot find anything talking about F/R issues in the Cisco
> > > > > > documentation,
> > > > > > > and just want to check that I'm not attempting to flog a dead
> > horse
> > > > > > here.
> > > > > > > Should this configuration work ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Extract from configs at end of email
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Derek...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > R1-multipoint-----point-to-point-R1-ethernet-----ethernet-R5
> > > > > > > |
> > > > > > > | f/r point-ro-point
> > > > > > > |
> > > > > > > |
> > > > > > > | f/r physical
> > > > > > > |
> > > > > > > R3
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > R1
> > > > > > > clns routing
> > > > > > > int s0.1 multipoint
> > > > > > > ip address 172.16.254.1 255.255.255.0
> > > > > > > ip router isis
> > > > > > > frame map ip 172.16.254.2 102 broadcast
> > > > > > > frame map clns 102 broadcast
> > > > > > > int s0.2 point-to-point
> > > > > > > ip address 172.16.253.1 255.255.255.0
> > > > > > > frame-relay interface-dlci 104
> > > > > > > ip router isis
> > > > > > > router isis
> > > > > > > net 00.0002.1111.1111.1111.00
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > R2
> > > > > > > clns routing
> > > > > > > int e 0
> > > > > > > ip address 172.16.5.2 255.255.255.0
> > > > > > > ip router isis
> > > > > > > int s0.1 point-to-point
> > > > > > > ip address 172.16.254.2 255.255.255.0
> > > > > > > frame-relay interface-dlci 201
> > > > > > > ip router isis
> > > > > > > router isis
> > > > > > > net 00.0002.2222.2222.2222.00
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > R5
> > > > > > > clns routing
> > > > > > > int e 0
> > > > > > > ip address 172.16.5.5 255.255.255.0
> > > > > > > ip router isis
> > > > > > > router isis
> > > > > > > net 00.0002.5555.5555.5555.00
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > R3
> > > > > > > clns routing
> > > > > > > int s0
> > > > > > > ip address 172.16.253.3 255.255.255.0
> > > > > > > encaps frame-relay
> > > > > > > frame-relay map ip 172.16.253.1 103 broadcast
> > > > > > > frame-relay map clns 103 broadcast
> > > > > > > ip router isis
> > > > > > > router isis
> > > > > > > net 00.0004.4444.4444.4444.00
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:21:39 GMT-3