From: Philip Neeson (Philip.Neeson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Dec 29 2000 - 20:53:05 GMT-3
Hi Guys,
I've been working on a simple DLSW+ over Frame Relay config.
(Ethernet)--[Router A]----<FRAME_RELAY>----[Router B]--(RING)
Using the example on CCO (See URL Below) I have been trying to set-up RFC
1490 with and without pass-through.
Set-up #1 (No Pass-thru, llc2 encap)
------------------------------------
With this initial set-up the DLSW peers get connected but fail to pass
reachability information. On Router_A I get a "%LINK-4-TOOBIG: Interface
Serial1, Output packet size of 1616 bytes too big" error.
I have tried adding "lf 516" to my remote-peer command but that fails to fix
the problem.
The only workaround I have found so far is to change the mtu of the serial
interfaces to say 2000. Once I've done that, reachability information is
passed and all functions ok.
I have tried this on IOS 12.0(9) and 11.2(2?) same result, I get the feeling
I'm missing something.
Any comments?
!
hostname Router_A
!
dlsw local-peer peer-id 3.3.3.3
dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface Serial1 400 lf 516
dlsw bridge-group 1
!
interface Ethernet0
ip address 192.168.69.228 255.255.255.0
bridge-group 1
!
interface Serial1
encapsulation frame-relay IETF
frame-relay map llc2 400
!
bridge 1 protocol ieee
!
!
hostname Router_B
!
source-bridge ring-group 100
dlsw local-peer peer-id 2.2.2.2
dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface Serial0 444 lf 516
!
interface Serial0
ip address 10.1.1.2 255.255.255.0
encapsulation frame-relay IETF
frame-relay map llc2 444
!
interface TokenRing0
ring-speed 16
source-bridge 25 1 100
source-bridge spanning
!
Set-up #2 (Pass-thru, dlsw encap)
------------------------------------
With the following set-up straight from CCO the DLSW peers simply won't
establish an adjancey.
It would almost seem as if the PVC isn't passing traffic but that isn't the
case as data is being transferred.
A "debug dlsw peer" shows both routers toggling between CAP_EXC and DISCONN
after timing out trying to exchange capability information.
It would appear that when Router_A sends a CAP_EXC msg it isn't seen on
Router_B (Well not in the debug anyway) and visa-versa.
Again I have tried this on IOS 12.0(9) and 11.2(2?) with the same result.
Any comments?
[Config snippets and debugs follow..]
!
hostname Router_A
!
dlsw local-peer peer-id 3.3.3.3
dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface Serial1 400 lf 516 pass-thru
dlsw bridge-group 1
!
interface Ethernet0
ip address 192.168.69.228 255.255.255.0
bridge-group 1
!
interface Serial1
encapsulation frame-relay IETF
frame-relay map dlsw 400
!
bridge 1 protocol ieee
!
!
hostname Router_B
!
source-bridge ring-group 100
dlsw local-peer peer-id 2.2.2.2
dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface Serial0 444 lf 516 pass-thru
!
interface Serial0
ip address 10.1.1.2 255.255.255.0
encapsulation frame-relay IETF
frame-relay map dlsw 444
!
interface TokenRing0
ring-speed 16
source-bridge 25 1 100
source-bridge spanning
!
---debug dlsw peer---- (Router A)
Router_A#
00:14:07: DLSw: START-FSTPFSM (peer on interface Serial1): event:ADMIN-OPEN
CONN
ECTION state:DISCONN
00:14:07: DLSw: dfstp_action_a() attempting to connect peer on interface
Serial1
00:14:07: DLSw: Connection opened for peer on interface Serial1
00:14:07: DLSw: CapExId Msg sent to peer on interface Serial1
00:14:07: DLSw: END-FSTPFSM (peer on interface Serial1):
state:DISCONN->WAIT_CAP
00:14:13: DLSw: START-FSTPFSM (peer on interface Serial1): event:TIMER-TIMER
EXP
IRED state:WAIT_CAP
00:14:13: DLSw: dfstp_action_d() close connection for peer on interface
Serial1
00:14:13: DLSw: DIRECT aborting connection for peer on interface Serial1
00:14:13: DLSw: END-FSTPFSM (peer on interface Serial1):
state:WAIT_CAP->DISCONN
Thanks,
Philip
Ref:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios120/12cgcr/ibm_c
/bcprt2/bcdlsw.htm#xtocid752115
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:26:13 GMT-3