From: Bernard Dunn (dunn@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Jan 21 2001 - 00:06:59 GMT-3
All,
You don't have to had a virtual ring configured for a ethernet only router
doing dlsw.
The main goal is to get the bridged traffic into dlsw pipe, and the peer
statements, along with 'dlsw bridge-group' is enough.
Regards
Bernard.
On Sat, 20 Jan 2001, Ronnie Royston wrote:
> Don't you need it if the ethernet is going to speak to a token ring on the
> DLSw peer? In my understanding, the only time that you shouldn't config a
> 'source-b ring-g' command is when it's ethernet back to back, no token rings
> in the mix. Can someone else please comment on this?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wayne Hu [mailto:wayneccie@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 8:36 AM
> To: Virnoche, Phil; CCIE newsgroup (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: Bootcamp Lab 3 Q
>
>
> You are right, you don't that statement for Ethernet
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> Virnoche, Phil
> Sent: Saturday, January 20, 2001 11:11 AM
> To: CCIE newsgroup (E-mail)
> Subject: Bootcamp Lab 3 Q
>
>
>
>
>
> Good morning All-
>
> I am scratching my head on this one,........ I did the DLSW+ config part of
> the lab, and as I always do my first swing thru the lab, I parse through the
> provided configs to see how "close" I am .....
>
> Well in the router 4 config there is this statement that I can't find any
> documentation to support: source-bridge ring-group 10
> >From my findings this should never appear on the ehternet end of a DLSW+
> configuration. Am I missing something?
>
> BTW- I looked through the FAQ's and didn't see this mentioned.
>
> Danka.
>
>
> Philip G. Virnoche CCNA
> Network Engineer - AT&T Wireless
> phone: 425.580.5239
> cell: 206.601.3134
>
> "HAM AND EGGS - A day's work for a chicken; A lifetime commitment for a
> pig."
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:37 GMT-3