From: Derek Small (Fuse) (dwsmall@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Apr 17 2000 - 22:56:34 GMT-3
I can't bring up the link you gave, but it sounds like you are talking about
the same thing. But I have seen a config like the one that Stan found in
several references to solve this problem? It sounds like you have quite a
bit of real world experience though....
Anyone else out there have any input??
If you are correct, and translational bridging is not needed;
1. Do you need three peer statements for full connectivity between the three
routers in the second example? or will two be enough? I have been told by
some experts that DLSW will not forward traffic from segments on R1 to
segments on R3 unless there is a peer connection between them, even if R1 is
peered to R2 and R2 is peered to R3.
2. If you had peerings between R1 and R2, and R2 and R3 alone, how would you
keep the Ethernet segments from communicating with the Token Ring segments
and vise-versa. In case that kind of config ever came up?
Thank You
Derek Small
dwsmall@fatkid.com
----- Original Message -----
From: John Conzone <jkconzone@home.com>
To: Stan Buskus <stan.buskus@worldnet.att.net>
Cc: Derek Small (Fuse) <dwsmall@fatkid.com>; ccielab
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2000 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: 2 DLSW questions.
>
> Stan, checkout this link, specifically the token ring to ethernet over
> WAN example.(http://cco.cisco.com/warp/customer/701/45.html).
> In Derek's second example, if the purpose is to get SNA traffic from
> R1's token ring to R3's ethernet, the media in between is transparent
using
> IP.
> I've implemeted DLSW over a large corporate network with various media
> types in between peers. TR to Ethernet, Serial, etc.
> Never used SRTB, SRT , not once. There have been occasions where I've
> had to convert the mac address on the hosts from canonical to
non-canonical
> to accout for the bit reversal, however.
> Perhaps we're talking about different architectures?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Stan Buskus <stan.buskus@worldnet.att.net>
> To: John Conzone <jkconzone@home.com>
> Cc: Derek Small (Fuse) <dwsmall@fatkid.com>; ccielab
> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Monday, April 17, 2000 6:45 PM
> Subject: Re: 2 DLSW questions.
>
>
> > I once thought DLSW took care of the translation. However, this is a
> > quote from the Cisco documentation:
> >
> > "Because DLSw+ does not do local translation between different LAN
> > types, Router B must be configured for SR/TLB by issuing the
> > source-bridge transparent command. Also, note that the bridge groups are
> > configured on the ethernet interfaces."
> >
> > See the example and explanation at:
> >
> >
>
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios120/12cgcr/ibm_c
> /bcprt2/bcdlsw.htm#xtocid752139
> >
> > John Conzone wrote:
> > >
> > > Derek, translational bridging is not neccessary at all for DLSW,
in
> > > either scenario if I understand you correctly. The beauty of DLSW is
> that
> > > all that is neccessary is IP connectivity (at least that is most
common,
> > > although other encaps are possible),between the end peers.
> > > So in your first scenario, R1 needs IP connectivity to R2. In your
> > > second scenario, R1 needs IP connectivity to R3. Thats it. You don't
> need
> > > translational bridging in the middle for DLSW between R1 and R3.
> > > What you do need is source routing enabled on the Token Ring
> interface
> > > side(R1) into a virtual ring, and a bridge group, typically IEEE,
> applied to
> > > the ethernet interface (R2, or R3 in the 2nd scenario) on that side
and
> that
> > > is piped to DLSW with the DLSW bridge group command.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Derek Small (Fuse) <dwsmall@fatkid.com>
> > > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > Sent: Monday, April 17, 2000 2:10 PM
> > > Subject: 2 DLSW questions.
> > >
> > > > I just need a double check on these from one of the more
knowledgeable
> > > DLSW
> > > > people.
> > > >
> > > > First scenario:
> > > >
> > > > Token ______ R1 _______Serial______ R2 _____ Ethernet segment
> > > > Ring
> > > >
> > > > I do not believe translational bridging is necessary for
connectivity
> > > > between systems on the Ethernet and Token Ring segments. Is this
> correct.
> > > >
> > > > Second scenario:
> > > >
> > > > Ethernet
> > > > |
> > > > |
> > > > Token _____R1______Serial______R2______Serial______R3______ Ethernet
> > > > Ring |
> > > > |
> > > > Token
> > > > Ring
> > > >
> > > > DLSW peers between R1 and R2, and between R2 and R3 are sufficient
to
> > > > provide full connectivity between the Token Ring on R1 and the
> Ethernet on
> > > > R3, only if translational bridging is configured on R2. Without
> > > > translational bridging on R2 only Ethernet to Ethernet, and Token
Ring
> to
> > > > Token Ring communications is possible. Is this correct?
> > > >
> > > > Thank You
> > > >
> > > > Derek Small
> > > > dwsmall@fatkid.com
> > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:23:14 GMT-3