RE: Another Caslow clarification needed

From: David Siwula (DSiwula@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Feb 08 2002 - 04:41:12 GMT-3

   
Basically, I think the key point would be to remember that the dlci is
always ONLY locally significant. It seems that the dynamically mapped ones
always cause problems so I always disable inverse arp. The only time you
would use the remote dlci is on the configuration of the frame switch w/the
frame-relay route statements.

Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: JOSE ANGEL MARTINEZ DE LA VARA [mailto:jamartinez@landata.payma.es]
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 11:37 PM
To: 'Jason Sinclair'; 'Przemyslaw Karwasiecki'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Another Caslow clarification needed

Hi,

I appologize, Jason, but could you please explain it again, please? I do not
understand. Are you having two ip addresses in the same interface (one
secondary, I guess) and then only the map works and inarp is disabled? I
know this question is a little messy, but I couldn't make it better since I
do not understand what you mean.

Thanks

Jose Angel

-----Mensaje original-----
De: Jason Sinclair [mailto:sinclairj@powertel.com.au]
Enviado el: viernes, 08 de febrero de 2002 02:46
Para: 'Przemyslaw Karwasiecki'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Asunto: RE: Another Caslow clarification needed

What he means here is that the inverse arp will be disabled if you reference
the same DLCI in a map statement.

So if you have the following:

RtrA---------DLCI16------------cloud--------------------DLCIx---------------
------RtrB----------------
192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2
                                                        10.0.1.2
And reference the 10.0.1.2 with a map, the inarp for 192.168.1.2 will fail
as you are referencing a DLCI that is used for both.

Cheers,

Jason Sinclair
Manager, Network Support Group
POWERTEL
Ground Level, 55 Clarence Street,
SYDNEY NSW 2000
AUSTRALIA
office: + 61 2 8264 3820
mobile: + 61 416 105 858
* sinclairj@powertel.com.au

                -----Original Message-----
                From: Przemyslaw Karwasiecki [mailto:karwas@ifxcorp.com]
                Sent: Friday, 8 February 2002 09:17
                To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
                Subject: Another Caslow clarification needed

                All,

                It looks like I am beating dead horse, but I failed my first
                attempt because of FR L3->L2 maping, so I really need to
understand it.

                At Caslow book, page 135, there is a following paragraph:
                    "If you have a number of Frame-Relay map statements on a
physical
                interface or on a multipoint subinterface and you type a
Frame-Relay
                interace-DLCI statement referencing the same DLCI that the
map
                statements were referencing, all of the map statements will
be erased."

                Now, please take a look:
                r1#sh run int s 0.1
                Building configuration...

                Current configuration : 291 bytes
                !
                interface Serial0.1 multipoint
                 ip address 10.10.1.1 255.255.0.0
                 no ip split-horizon
                 frame-relay map ip 10.10.1.2 102
                 frame-relay map ip 10.10.1.3 103
                 frame-relay map ip 10.10.1.5 105
                 frame-relay interface-dlci 102
                 frame-relay interface-dlci 103
                 frame-relay interface-dlci 105
                end

                r1#

                What should I think about it?

                Thanks for your comments,

                Przemek
        

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 20 2002 - 13:46:15 GMT-3