From: Albert Lu (albert_ccie@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Oct 23 2001 - 13:36:15 GMT-3
So I should be able to specify a higher bandwidth for the frame relay
interface than the isdn dialer interface, allowing the isdn dialer interface
to be a backup interface?
I got a problem at the moment, as the two links are being load balanced
between them.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Richard Foltz
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 2:12 AM
To: Albert Lu; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Backup Dialers
well, igrp/eigrp use bandwidth for metric calculation, so u can influence
route choice with the protocols using the bandwidth command under the
interface. also, u can manipulate the delay for the interface to influence
the route decision as well.
Richard Foltz, CCNP-Voice, CCDP, MCSE+I, Network+, A+
3rd Attemp @ RTP 11/2
----- Original Message -----
From: "Albert Lu" <albert_ccie@yahoo.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 10:32 AM
Subject: Backup Dialers
> Could someone please clarify the different ways of having backup dialers
for
> the various protocols.
>
> >From my understanding, you can use (please let me know if there are
others):
> * Backup command
> * Floating static route (static route with admin distance greater than the
> IGP's admin distance)
> * Dialer Watch
>
> However, from what I know OSPF can have it's interface cost manipulated so
> the dialer interface will remain the backup because of it's higher cost. I
> believe the command is "ip ospf cost XX".
>
> I also know that the bandwidth of the interface can be manipulated so that
> OSPF cost of the interface can also be manipulated that way.
>
> So would I be able to manipulate the bandwidth parameters for EIGRP and
IGRP
> for it to calculate a lower cost for the dialers, in order for it to be a
> backup interface since there is no command to manipulate cost on an
> interface for EIGRP/IGRP?
>
> Thanks
>
> Albert
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 20 2002 - 22:33:24 GMT-3