From: Rob Webber (rwebber@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Jan 15 2001 - 11:49:07 GMT-3
I just got back from taking Bruce Caslow's course (excellent, btw) and this
came up in discussion. Our conclusion was that in "newer" versions of IOS
Cisco probably leaves inarp on despite static mappings (a change from older
versions). Static Frame-Relay mappings can still be extremely useful - not
all protocols will allow spoke-spoke pings without the map statements.
I fully agree with an earlier response - know how to make it work with and
without maps statements because you never know what restrictions the lab
will throw at you.
Bruce's rule of them was "if they'll let you nail it down (Frame maps,
dialer maps, speed, duplex, etc.) then nail it down."
Rob.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Cameron, John
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 9:17 AM
To: 'Stephen Masraum'; Nigel Taylor; CCIE_Lab Group Study
Cc: Bryant Andrews
Subject: RE: Frame Relay...Inverse-Arp..?
I'm using a 11.3 version and have consistently had the same results. Is
Caslow wrong when he stated that Inverse Arp for a specific DLCI gets
disable after a reload if you have the same DLCI mapped in a FR map
statement?
JC
C i s c o S y s t e m s John Cameron
Network Engineer
Research Triangle Park
|| || Cisco Systems, Inc.
|| ||
|||| ||||
..:||||||:..:||||||:..
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Masraum [mailto:masraum@swbell.net]
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 12:35 AM
To: Nigel Taylor; CCIE_Lab Group Study; Cisco Group Study
Cc: Bryant Andrews
Subject: RE: Frame Relay...Inverse-Arp..?
That is weird. I've never seen it happen before, I would bet it's a
12.1
thing.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Nigel Taylor
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 11:10 PM
To: CCIE_Lab Group Study; Cisco Group Study; Stephen Masraum
Cc: Bryant Andrews
Subject: Re: Frame Relay...Inverse-Arp..?
Stephen,
Yep, that's exactly that happened. Here's the important
config stuff...
Here's the layout..
I've got the typical hub and spoke topology frame cloud. I've got all 4
devices
using physical and using Inverse-Arp to dynamically activate the PVC's.
here's the
pertinent configs..... I ran through this a couple more times with the
same
result...in some
instances it took a while but Inverse-Arp eventually worked.
HUB router...running 12.1.4 code..
interface Serial1
ip address 172.16.10.1 255.255.255.0
encapsulation frame-relay IETF
r2_01#sh frame map
Serial1 (up): ip 172.16.10.2 dlci 201(0xC9,0x3090), dynamic,
broadcast,
IETF, status defined, active
Serial1 (up): ip 172.16.10.3 dlci 301(0x12D,0x48D0), dynamic,
broadcast,
IETF, status defined, active
Serial1 (up): ip 172.16.10.4 dlci 401(0x191,0x6410), dynamic,
broadcast,
IETF, status defined, active
Spoke 1.. running 11.3(11a)T1
interface Serial1
ip address 172.16.10.2 255.255.255.0
encapsulation frame-relay IETF
frame-relay map ip 172.16.10.4 102
r4_02c#sh fram map
Serial1 (up): ip 172.16.10.1 dlci 102(0x66,0x1860), dynamic,
broadcast,
IETF, status defined, active
Serial1 (up): ip 172.16.10.4 dlci 102(0x66,0x1860), static,
IETF, status defined, active
Spoke 2.....running 11.3(11a)T1
interface Serial0
ip address 172.16.10.4 255.255.255.0
encapsulation frame-relay
frame-relay map ip 172.16.10.2 104
frame-relay map ip 172.16.10.3 104
!
r1_fs#sh fram map
Serial0 (up): ip 172.16.10.1 dlci 104(0x68,0x1880), dynamic,
broadcast,, status defined, active
Serial0 (up): ip 172.16.10.2 dlci 104(0x68,0x1880), static,
CISCO, status defined, active
Serial0 (up): ip 172.16.10.3 dlci 104(0x68,0x1880), static,
CISCO, status defined, active
Anyone got any IOS bug reports on this one...?
Nigel.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:30 GMT-3