From: Padhu (LFG) (padhu@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue May 22 2001 - 17:31:49 GMT-3
Theodore TZEVELEKIS :
This is precisely it. The local peer on both sides is the logical interface
which is loopback 0.
you control what remote peer can send traffic to the local restricted ring /
bgroup list. I am kinda rusty on dlsw right now....Will setup the lab and
send the configs hopefully with the snasw to simulate dlsw traffic.
Cheers,Padhu
-----Original Message-----
From: Jorge Mastrapa [mailto:jmastrap@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 3:28 PM
To: Michael Davis; Choon, Raymond (); 'Padhu (LFG)'; 'RAMIL'; Theodore
TZEVELEKIS; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Cc: gorrior@yahoo.com
Subject: RE: 2 dlsw peers. On both you have Ethernet and TR
Ring lists with multiple remote peers
ej.. ( by mem so look the commands just to be sure but .. )
R1 ----------------- R2
E0 1.1.1.1 E0 2.2.2.2
T0 3.3.3.3 T0 4.4.4.4
L0 5.5.5.5 L0 6.6.6.6
R1
dlsw local-peer peer-id 5.5.5.5
dlsw remote-peer 1 tcp 2.2.2.2
dlsw remote-peer 2 tcp 4.4.4.4
dlsw bridge-group 1
source-bridge ring-group 100
dlsw ring-list 1 ring 1
dlsw ring-list 2 ring 100
e 0
ip add 1.1.1.1
bridge-group 1
t0
ip add 3.3.3.3
source-bridge 10 1 100
The other router same config ( just change the numbers :-)
my $.02
J.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> Michael Davis
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 1:07 PM
> To: Choon, Raymond (); 'Padhu (LFG)'; 'RAMIL'; Theodore TZEVELEKIS;
> ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Cc: gorrior@yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: 2 dlsw peers. On both you have Ethernet and TR
>
>
> I think this is where you would use port-lists, no?
>
> Mike
> #7303
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Choon, Raymond ()" <rchoon@att.com>
> To: "'Padhu (LFG)'" <padhu@steinroe.com>; "'RAMIL'" <ramil@SkiBuff.com>;
> "Theodore TZEVELEKIS" <theodore_tzevelekis@yahoo.com>;
> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Cc: <gorrior@yahoo.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 12:33 PM
> Subject: RE: 2 dlsw peers. On both you have Ethernet and TR
>
>
> > Padhu,
> >
> > I second your solution. This is what I would do.
> >
> > Raymond
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Padhu (LFG) [mailto:padhu@steinroe.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 11:41 AM
> > To: 'RAMIL'; Theodore TZEVELEKIS; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Cc: gorrior@yahoo.com
> > Subject: RE: 2 dlsw peers. On both you have Ethernet and TR
> >
> >
> > Just my 2c
> >
> > R1--------------R2
> > ETh ETH
> > TR TR
> > On R1 and R2 , assign ip to ETH and TR interfaces and complete the dlsw
> > configurations
> > create a bridge group for ETh and Ring list for TR on both R1 and R2
> > respectively.
> > Create the remote peers on R1 with bgroup as the local target
> pointing to
> > R2's ethernet as peer
> > repeat this 3 more times for the 3 other interfaces.
> >
> > Somone correct me if this wouldn't work.
> >
> > Cheers,Padhu
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: RAMIL [mailto:ramil@SkiBuff.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 10:35 AM
> > To: Theodore TZEVELEKIS; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Cc: gorrior@yahoo.com
> > Subject: Re:
> >
> >
> > border peers?
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Theodore TZEVELEKIS" <theodore_tzevelekis@yahoo.com>
> > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Cc: <gorrior@yahoo.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2001 11:28 AM
> >
> >
> > > Suppose you have 2 dlsw peers. On both you have
> > > Ethernet and TR.
> > >
> > > However, you only want the 2 ethernets to communicate
> > > with eachother and the two TR with eachother.
> > >
> > > In other words, no TR traffic should be seen on either
> > > ethernet and no ethernet traffic should be seen on
> > > either TR.
> > >
> > > Any ideas about how to do this?
> > >
> > > Please reply to all.
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:30:49 GMT-3