From: crl (cisco@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Apr 28 2001 - 16:30:03 GMT-3
Very simple test scenario:
r1---eth---r2---tok---r3
r2 has IP routing disabled. It is strictly doing transparent bridging. His
relevant config is as follows:
no ip routing
!
interface Ethernet0
bridge-group 1
!
interface TokenRing0
bridge-group 1
!
bridge 1 protocol ieee
bridge 1 bitswap_layer3_addresses
Now - r1 and r3 are addressed on the same subnet. They each have a loopback
as well. They can ping and telnet to each other through the transparent
bridge. When RIP is enabled, they each learn a route for each other's
loopback. When EIGRP is enabled, they cannot establish an adjacency.
Conclusion is that the bitswap_layer3_addresses kludge does not work with
EIGRP and OSPF.
Now - the fun part? Theories why? I thought multicast was the issue, but
RIP2 is multicast and works properly...
----- Original Message -----
From: "crl" <cisco@crl.fdns.net>
To: "Groupstudy" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 12:13 PM
Subject: Translational Bridging between Token Ring and Ethernet, IRB, and
Various Routing Protocols
> Doing some experiments. Topology is:
>
> r4---token-ring---r3---ethernet---r2
>
> On r3, I'm doing SR/TLB and IRB. The Token Ring and Ethernet are a common,
> bridged subnet, and r3 has other interfaces that are routed (serials) but
I
> don't think they're relvant to this discussion.
>
> Experimenting with various routing protocols on this network segment. I
> found that RIP1, RIP2, and IGRP work well in this situation. OSPF and
EIGRP
> do not establish adjacencies. I have the bitswap-layer3-addresses command
in
> place to allow ping, telnet etc to work well between all three routers.
>
> Take OSPF for example.
> r4#sh ip ospf nei
> <no output>
>
> r3#sh ip ospf nei
> Neighbor ID Pri State Dead Time Address
Interface
> 197.7.77.1 1 INIT/DROTHER 00:00:35 197.7.8.4 BVI1
> 197.7.8.10 1 FULL/DR 00:00:33 197.7.8.10 BVI1
>
> r2#sh ip ospf nei
> Neighbor ID Pri State Dead Time Address
Interface
> 197.7.77.1 1 INIT/DROTHER 00:00:39 197.7.8.4
Ethernet0
> 197.7.8.3 1 FULL/BDR 00:00:31 197.7.8.3
Ethernet0
>
> Doesn't seem to make much sense. I suspected it was a multicast issue, but
> RIP2 works well. It's not an MTU problem, I checked that out - everything
is
> set to 1500. I suspect the bitswap-layer3 command might be mangling EIGRP
> and/or OSPF, but not RIP and IGRP.
>
> Here's the relevant configs. I'd just like to know if this is impossible
> (great!) or if I'm missing something (doh!):
>
>
> r4#sh run
> !
> interface Loopback0
> ip address 197.7.77.1 255.255.255.0
> no ip directed-broadcast
> !
> interface TokenRing0
> mtu 1500
> ip address 197.7.6.4 255.255.255.0 secondary
> ip address 197.7.8.4 255.255.255.0
> no ip directed-broadcast
> ip nat outside
> ring-speed 16
> !
> router ospf 1
> network 197.7.0.0 0.0.255.255 area 0
>
> -------------------------------------------
>
> r3#sh run
> !
> bridge irb
> !
> interface Ethernet0
> no ip address
> no ip directed-broadcast
> bridge-group 1
> !
> interface Serial1
> ip address 197.7.7.3 255.255.255.0
> no ip directed-broadcast
> !
> interface TokenRing0
> mtu 1500
> no ip address
> no ip directed-broadcast
> ring-speed 16
> bridge-group 1
> !
> interface BVI1
> ip address 197.7.8.3 255.255.255.0
> no ip directed-broadcast
> !
> router ospf 1
> network 197.7.0.0 0.0.255.255 area 0
> !
> bridge 1 protocol ieee
> bridge 1 bitswap-layer3-addresses
> bridge 1 route ip
>
> -------------------------------------------
>
> r2#sh run
> !
> interface Ethernet0
> ip address 197.7.8.10 255.255.255.0
> !
> !
> router ospf 1
> network 197.7.0.0 0.0.255.255 area 0
> **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:30:00 GMT-3