From: Nigel Taylor (nigel_taylor@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Feb 04 2001 - 19:50:05 GMT-3
Steven,
Based on the lab requirements the 2WAY relationship should not
exist at all. Since we're only suppose to make use of the PVC's in a hub
and spoke topology. Meaning that both spokes would have a FULL/DR state
with r2(the hub) and r3 will have a FULL adjacency with r2 over the Bri0
line...
Things got a bit confusing because I was looking at a design that provided
better redundancy in the event of the serial link failure at r2(the hub). I
was able to test out making r4 the hub, as well using a full mesh and be
able to loose the serial link from either r2 or r3 using the bri demand
circuit to provide connectivity....
Of course this was one of the lab requirements in not allowing you to use
the backup interface, watch-groups and floating static routes...
Thanks
Nigel..
----- Original Message -----
From: Steven Weber <itweber@netzero.net>
To: Nigel Taylor <nigel_taylor@hotmail.com>
Cc: Frank Liang <liangfrank@hotmail.com>; <Justin.Menga@computerland.co.nz>;
<fwells12@hotmail.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 3:32 PM
Subject: Re: ISDN questions ...!
> I'm not exactly sure on how your scenario is working but when you have a
DR/BDR
> election only these two routers will be in the FULL state with each of the
other
> routers but all of the other routers will be in the 2WAY state with each
other
> and only have a FULL connection to the DR/BDR.
> Hope I helped : )
> Steve
>
> Nigel Taylor wrote:
>
> > Frank,
> > I noticed this... but I was under the impression that this
was a
> > typo... Based on the topology map I see that the drawing has R2
connecting
> > to each spoke. But, looking at config for R1 in the solution it makes
use
> > of the full mesh. In my config I'm using frame mappings from r3 to r2
and
> > r3 to r4. So with the config as they have it you cannot loose the
frame
> > conn. from R2 to the cloud or R2 and R3 is isolated from the
network.......
> >
> > What I'm also trying to work out is the reasoning behind not using the
full
> > mesh to provide connectivity in the event that r2 looses the frame
circuit.
> > Also why make it the hub..? Wouldn't R4 be a better choice for being a
hub
> > since it physically connected to the rest of the network....?
> >
> > Another thing I observed was the frame cloud is configured as a
broadcast
> > cloud but the "ip ospf priority" assigned to r3 and r4 uses a value of
"0".
> > This is doesn't allow a DR to elected on the segment when r2 lost it's
frame
> > connection to the cloud.....
> >
> > Well, I think these labs are a good resource but I must remember they
are
> > "FREE". I'm I thinking to much here or does the lab requirements not
> > provide a clear outline as to the requirements....? Can someone read
the
> > Lab sheet and tell me if it's clear as to how the solution provided
makes
> > sense and completes the requirements..
> >
> > Nigel..
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Frank Liang <liangfrank@hotmail.com>
> > To: <nigel_taylor@hotmail.com>; <Justin.Menga@computerland.co.nz>;
> > <fwells12@hotmail.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 1:51 PM
> > Subject: Re: ISDN questions ...!
> >
> > > Nigel,
> > > by looking at the fatkid 401 diagram, the frame cloud is hub and
spoke. If
> > you look at the solution, on R3, it maps r2 and r4 ip address to the
same
> > dlci 102. R2 is a hub!
> > >
> > > FL
> > >
> > > >From: "Nigel Taylor" <nigel_taylor@hotmail.com>
> > > >Reply-To: "Nigel Taylor" <nigel_taylor@hotmail.com>
> > > >To: "Justin Menga" <Justin.Menga@computerland.co.nz>,
"fwells12"
> > <fwells12@hotmail.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > >Subject: Re: ISDN questions ...!
> > > >Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2001 08:35:28 -0500
> > > >
> > > >Justin,
> > > > I'm using OSPF demand circuit and seeing the results I
> > > >described... I'm still trying to work through why R3 stays in a 2WAY
> > > >neighbor state with R4. In this scenario the frame cloud is full
mesh.
> > > >
> > > >Any thoughts....
> > > >
> > > >Thanks
> > > >Nigel..
> > > >
> > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > >From: Justin Menga <Justin.Menga@computerland.co.nz>
> > > >To: 'Nigel Taylor' <nigel_taylor@hotmail.com>; fwells12
> > > ><fwells12@hotmail.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > >Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 6:07 AM
> > > >Subject: RE: ISDN questions ...!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Well that just leaves OSPF demand circuit....
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Justin Menga CCIE #6640 MCSE+I CCSE
> > > > > WAN Specialist
> > > > > Computerland New Zealand
> > > > > PO Box 3631, Auckland
> > > > > DDI: (+64) 9 360 4864 Mobile: (+64) 25 349 599
> > > > > mailto: justin.menga@computerland.co.nz
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Nigel Taylor [mailto:nigel_taylor@hotmail.com]
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 8:58 PM
> > > > > To: fwells12; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > > Subject: Re: ISDN questions ...!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > fwells12,
> > > > > The lab says I cannot use the backup interface
> > command,
> > > > > floating static's or watch groups....
> > > > >
> > > > > For more detail info.. it the 401 Adv. OSPF lab on www.fatkid.com.
> > > > >
> > > > > Nigel..
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: fwells12 <fwells12@hotmail.com>
> > > > > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 2:42 AM
> > > > > Subject: Re: ISDN questions ...!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Make sure your idle-timeout is at least a minute, and that you
have
> > the
> > > > > > backup command on the serial interface that is being backed up.
Set
> > the
> > > > > > backup delay to be short coming up so routes start propagating
> > > > > immediately.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: Nigel Taylor <nigel_taylor@hotmail.com>
> > > > > > To: Price, Jamie <JPrice@isgteam.com>; Cisco Group Study
> > > > > > <cisco@groupstudy.com>; CCIE_Lab Group Study
> > <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > > > Cc: Bryant Andrews <Bryant_Andrews@hotmail.com>
> > > > > > Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2001 11:25 PM
> > > > > > Subject: Re: ISDN questions ...!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > jamie,
> > > > > > > Ok, did some more testing and this thing will work
> > without
> > > >a
> > > > > > > name. I also changed the dialer idle-time-out value. The one
> > problem
> > > > > I'm
> > > > > > > seeing now is on router 2. When I pull the serial conn. from
> > router 3
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > the frame switch the bri line kick in and passes all the
routes.
> > > >However
> > > > > > > when I break the link from r2 to the frame switch,
nothing.....
> > R3
> > > > > never
> > > > > > > forms a full state with R4 and r2 and R3 doesn't pass routes
even
> > > >though
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > bri line is up....
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Any thoughts..
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Nigel...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: Price, Jamie <JPrice@isgteam.com>
> > > > > > > To: 'Nigel Taylor' <nigel_taylor@hotmail.com>; Cisco Group
Study
> > > > > > > <cisco@groupstudy.com>; CCIE_Lab Group Study
> > <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > > > > Cc: Bryant Andrews <Bryant_Andrews@hotmail.com>
> > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 1:49 AM
> > > > > > > Subject: RE: ISDN questions ...!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Just an FYI/gotcha
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think setting the dialer idle-timeout to 1 causes
problems.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We're all impatient and want the line to come down quickly
so we
> > can
> > > > > > prove
> > > > > > > > the solution but I've noticed that when the "dialer
> > idle-timeout" is
> > > > > > less
> > > > > > > > than the "dialer wait-for-carrier-time" then behaviour that
is
> > > > > > comparable
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > what you mention here (flapping line) occurs.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Jamie
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: Nigel Taylor [mailto:nigel_taylor@hotmail.com]
> > > > > > > > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2001 12:38 AM
> > > > > > > > To: Cisco Group Study; CCIE_Lab Group Study
> > > > > > > > Cc: Bryant Andrews
> > > > > > > > Subject: ISDN questions ...!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm working through one of the labs at fatkid(401, Advanced
> > OSPF)
> > > >and
> > > > > =
> > > > > > > > have a couple of questions. The one part of the
configuration I
> > > >can't
> > > > > =
> > > > > > > > understand is the BRI's on R2 and R3. There is no
> > configuration
> > > >for
> > > > > =
> > > > > > > > the name of the calling device or called device. when I
tried
> > this
> > > > > the
> > > > > > =
> > > > > > > > routers would no connect, well at least not for more than a
> > second.
> > > >=
> > > > > > > > "debug ppp nego" showed called from <unknown> hang-up. Most
> > > >examples
> > > > > =
> > > > > > > > I've worked with makes use of the name option on the "dialer
> > map" =
> > > > > > > > command?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > My other question is specific to the "dialer idle-timeout 1
> > either".
> > > > > I
> > > > > > =
> > > > > > > > know what the command does but with one second.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Has anyone worked through this lab and got it working with
the
> > > > > solution
> > > > > > =
> > > > > > > > on the site... What was your observations on the bri line.
> > > > > > > > Mines keep bouncing up and down...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > TIA
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Nigel..
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:28:36 GMT-3