From: Tony Medeiros (tonygreat@xxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Sep 01 2000 - 03:57:40 GMT-3
Try it and you'll like it !!! I don't know what it was really designed for
but it sure comes in handy. The only bad thing is it saves a lot of
messages in a buffer and if you exit your exec session and return, you get
a quite a few messages after resumeing your session. Not to bad an
anoyance considering though
Tony
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Munzani" <sam@chinet.com>
To: "Tony Medeiros" <tonygreat@home.com>
Cc: "Kevin Baumgartner" <kbaumgar@cisco.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2000 7:40 AM
Subject: Re: My favorate alias commands (was Inverse ARP and Subinterfaces)
> Thanks a lot Tony,
>
> It definately helps. I will add that in my list of commnad to blast on
> each router.
>
> BTW, One of the CCIE I know for a while had recommended me to use
> following command on each router during lab.
>
> line con 0
> logging synchronous
>
> He said that command will help a ton during lab. I was unable to
> understand exactly what is the effect of that command. What is difference
> between sync and async logging? If you know and can explain please help.
>
> Thanks in advance ,
>
> Sam
>
> On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Tony Medeiros wrote:
>
> > I used these alias commands on every practice lab I do. The short cuts
> > became second nature after a while. I paste them into every router
along
> > with the usuals like "ip subnet-zero" etc
> >
> > alias exec s sho run
> > alias exec c conf t
> > alias exec i sho ip route
> > alias exec x sho ipx route
> > alias exec a sho apple route
> > alias exec ib sho ip inter brief
> > alias exec xb sho ipx inter brief
> > alias exec ab sho apple inter brief
> > alias exec az sho apple zone
> > alias exec xs sho ipx servers
> > alias exec b sho ip bgp
> > alias exec bn sho ip bgp nei
> >
> > Whats nice too is on newer versions of code (12.0 and up I think) you
can
> > do a "s inter f1/0" which is equal to "sho running config interface fast
> > 1/0" and get just that part of the config instead of the whole thing.
Saves
> > time and wear and tear on the space bar!!
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> > Tony Medeiros
> > CCIE 6172 for one day now
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Sam Munzani" <sam@chinet.com>
> > To: "Kevin Baumgartner" <kbaumgar@cisco.com>
> > Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 3:25 PM
> > Subject: Re: Inverse ARP and Subinterfaces
> >
> >
> > > I Agree with you.
> > >
> > > Somebody posted here yesterday that he used a lot of alias commands to
> > > save typings.
> > >
> > > Can you share some of those with group please? I would like to avoid
as
> > > much typing as I can becuse of my fat finguring habbits.
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance,
> > >
> > > Sam
> > >
> > > On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Kevin Baumgartner wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sure more typing but it avoids a lot of frustration in the lab with
> > > > trying to get Framerelay connections up and going.
> > > >
> > > > Maybe not the recommended way of doing it in the real world but I
> > > > would recommend using only frame-maps in the lab.
> > > >
> > > > But it's only a sugestion and that's what I am going to do in the
lab.
> > > > The first time I took the test I ran into a lot of problems getting
> > > > inverse-arp to work. And the Framerelay part of the test is not much
> > points
> > > > anyways.
> > > >
> > > > I would rather spend my time on the rest of the test where the
points
> > > > are and not try to figure out inverse-arp.
> > > >
> > > > - Kevin
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On HUB router using Multipoint why not? Since it will learn remote
> > > > > networks by Inverse-ARP there would be no need to have Frame-relay
> > > > > maps. This saves a lot of typing time if you have many spokes with
IP,
> > > > > IPX, Apple, Dec and god knows what other protocols they may ask
for.
> > > > >
> > > > > Without using Inverse-ARP you will end up having 10-12 map
statements.
> > > > >
> > > > > For spokes,
> > > > > I am strongly in favor of using Static maps.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sam
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Alan Simpkins wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Having taken the lab 3 times now, and being scheduled
> > > > > > for #4, I would recommend against using inverse-arp,
> > > > > > except where required if at all.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- Shaun Nicholson <Shaun.Nicholson@kp.org> wrote:
> > > > > > > Another issue with inverse arp what if you have a
> > > > > > > fully meshed frame relay network but you are not
> > > > > > > allowed to use all of the PVC's.
> > > > > > > Inverse arp will use the all the DLCI's available
> > > > > > > and you could end up using a PVC you are not allowed
> > > > > > > too and not be awair of what you've done.
> > > > > > > Think about it in the pressure of the lab
> > > > > > > environment you see its up and you can ping so you
> > > > > > > dont bother doing a sh frame map or sh frame pvc and
> > > > > > > you've lost points without realizing it.
> > > > > > > Map statements mean you avoid using the PVC you are
> > > > > > > not allowed to use.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree with the Frame-relay map, frame-relay map,
> > > > > > > frame-relay map ...... statement.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Way too many issues with the inverse arp in the lab.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Shaun
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > kbaumgar@cisco.com on 08/29/2000 11:55:00 PM
> > > > > > > To: masalmon@cisco.com@Internet
> > > > > > > cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com@Internet (bcc: Shaun
> > > > > > > Nicholson/MD/KAIPERM)
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Inverse ARP and Subinterfaces
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My recommendation is to not depending on inverse
> > > > > > > arp when doing
> > > > >
> > > > > > > the lab. It can be something problematic to get
> > > > > > > things working and
> > > > > > > you can waste a lot of time trying to get things to
> > > > > > > work.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I know of someone that spend 1/2 of the first day
> > > > > > > just trying to
> > > > > > > get framerelay working and pinging between routers.
> > > > > > > And didn't even
> > > > > > > get to finish most of the questions because of this.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The recommend I heard from some which I agree with
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > Frame-relay map, frame-relay map, frame-relay map
> > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Kevin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > No can do you are using map statements. My
> > > > > > > contention is to use inverse
> > > > > > > > arp. I realize that you can use map statements to
> > > > > > > achieve
> > > > > > > > reachability. I wish ot use inverse arps on the
> > > > > > > hub router.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Simon Baxter wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Yip, just added it just for you!!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > interface Serial0
> > > > > > > > > ip address 192.1.1.2 255.255.255.0
> > > > > > > > > encapsulation frame-relay
> > > > > > > > > no ip mroute-cache
> > > > > > > > > ip policy route-map policy
> > > > > > > > > frame-relay traffic-shaping
> > > > > > > > > frame-relay priority-dlci-group 1 100 200 300
> > > > > > > 400
> > > > > > > > > frame-relay map bridge 400 broadcast
> > > > > > > > > frame-relay map ip 192.1.1.1 100 broadcast
> > > > > > > > > frame-relay map ipx A.0000.0c01.1235 300
> > > > > > > broadcast
> > > > > > > > > frame-relay map appletalk 300.1 200 broadcast
> > > > > > > > > no frame-relay inverse-arp
> > > > > > > > > frame-relay qos-autosense
> > > > > > > > > !
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > interface Serial0.2 multipoint
> > > > > > > > > ip address 202.1.1.2 255.255.255.0
> > > > > > > > > cdp enable
> > > > > > > > > frame-relay interface-dlci 500
> > > > > > > > > !
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > RTRB#
> > > > > > > > > RTRB#show frame map
> > > > > > > > > Serial0 (up): bridge dlci 400(0x190,0x6400),
> > > > > > > static,
> > > > > > > > > broadcast,
> > > > > > > > > CISCO, status defined, active
> > > > > > > > > Serial0 (up): ip 192.1.1.1 dlci
> > > > > > > 100(0x64,0x1840), static,
> > > > > > > > > broadcast,
> > > > > > > > > CISCO, status defined, active
> > > > > > > > > Priority DLCI Group 1, DLCI 100 (HIGH), DLCI
> > > > > > > 200 (MEDIUM)
> > > > > > > > > DLCI 300 (NORMAL), DLCI 400 (LOW)
> > > > > > > > > Serial0.2 (up): ip 202.1.1.1 dlci
> > > > > > > 500(0x1F4,0x7C40), dynamic,
> > > > > > > > > broadcast,, status defined, active
> > > > > > > > > Serial0 (up): ipx A.0000.0c01.1235 dlci
> > > > > > > 300(0x12C,0x48C0), static,
> > > > > > > > > broadcast,
> > > > > > > > > CISCO, status defined, active
> > > > > > > > > Serial0 (up): appletalk 300.1 dlci
> > > > > > > 200(0xC8,0x3080), static,
> > > > > > > > > broadcast,
> > > > > > > > > CISCO, status defined, active
> > > > > > > > > RTRB#ping 202.1.1.1
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Type escape sequence to abort.
> > > > > > > > > Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 202.1.1.1,
> > > > > > > timeout is 2 seconds:
> > > > > > > > > !!!!!
> > > > > > > > > Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip
> > > > > > > min/avg/max = 56/59/60 ms
> > > > > > > > > RTRB#
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > as you'll see, everything else apart from s0.2
> > > > > > > is static and no inverse
> > > > > > > > > arped...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Simon
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > > From: mark salmon [mailto:masalmon@cisco.com]
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 2:31 PM
> > > > > > > > > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > > > > > > Subject: Inverse ARP and Subinterfaces
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > HAs anyone been able to get inverse arp to work
> > > > > > > with frame relay
> > > > > > > > > multipoint subinterfaces? According to Caslow,
> > > > > > > multipoint subinterfaces
> > > > > > > > > do inverse arp by default. I have not been able
> > > > > > > to set it up that way
> > > > > > > > > in a hub and spoke environment (both sides
> > > > > > > multipoint subinterfaces).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Any ideas?
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Mark Salmon
> > > > > > > > > Project Engineer
> > > > > > > > > Cisco Professional Services
> > > > > > > > > Phone:773-695-8235
> > > > > > > > > Pager:800-365-4578
> > > > > > > > > email: masalmon@cisco.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:24:51 GMT-3