From: John Neiberger (neiby@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Mar 14 2002 - 12:37:56 GMT-3
I know that, but we're doing SR/TLB so the entire transparent
bridging domain appears as a ring to the SRB domain, in effect
giving us two rings.
In my example, the TR interface on R3 is on ring 10. Because
of SR/TLB, the TB domain appears to be on ring 200.
So, from the perspective of the SRB domain, we have two rings.
Of course, the ethernet side isn't aware of any of this.
I don't have a router with TR interfaces here at work so I
can't test this. Perhaps someone who has the setup available
could pop in these configs without 'multiring ip' and make sure
it works. I'm fairly sure, but not positive, that I tested it
without it and didn't work.
Regards,
John
---- On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, steven.j.nelson@bt.com
(steven.j.nelson@bt.com) wrote:
> No because there are no RIFs on Ethernet, so no need for
Multiring IP
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Neiberger [mailto:neiby@ureach.com]
> Sent: 14 March 2002 15:29
> To: Nelson,SJ,Steven,IVNH25 C; RSiddappa@NECBNS.com;
> ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: RE: SR/TLB for IP Discoveries (LONG)
>
>
> As I see it, though, from the perspective of the token-ring-
> only router, the ethernet domain is a different ring. So,
from
> it's perspective, there are two rings. It's my (limited)
> understanding that without multiring ip, the TR-only router
> would only speak IP to devices on the same ring.
>
> Is that correct or not? Admittedly, SRB isn't my strong
point.
>
> John
>
> ---- On Thu, 14 Mar 2002, steven.j.nelson@bt.com
> (steven.j.nelson@bt.com) wrote:
>
> > All
> >
> > As far as I understand this, Multiring IP is not required
in
> this
> > sceanrio.
> > Multiring IP is used on a TR interface to enable the use
and
> the caching
> > of
> > RIF information when SRB to another ring or srb domain.
> >
> > If no rif is found in the packet that hits the ring with
> Multiring IP
> > configured then the router will act as an SRB end station
and
> send out a
> > test frame (explorer) to locate the destination and then
pass
> the packet
> > back to the source host with the RIF information so the
host
> can then
> > send
> > an XID to the destination.
> >
> > Not required when SRB/TLB between ring and ethernet.
> >
> > Just my two cents and probably wrong !!!
> >
> > Ta
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: RSiddappa@NECBNS.com [mailto:RSiddappa@NECBNS.com]
> > Sent: 14 March 2002 06:42
> > To: neiby@ureach.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: SR/TLB for IP Discoveries (LONG)
> >
> >
> > John,
> >
> > This is absolutely good and workign config. But I am stll
not
> sure do u
> > need
> > that multiring Ip on the token ring interface fo the router
> doign
> > Translational bridging.
> >
> > I do no think. I had it workign with out that few days back.
> >
> > R.
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Neiberger [mailto:neiby@ureach.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 12:17 AM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: SR/TLB for IP Discoveries (LONG)
> >
> >
> > Since I was temporarily fed up with staring at ipsec
configs
> I
> > thought I'd take a crack at the SR/TLB stuff going on
today.
> I
> > wasn't able to make this work using the configs posted
> today.
> > In fact, I can't figure out why the posted configs were
> working
> > at all. :-)
> >
> > I printed out three different docs from CCO and cross-
> > referenced that with examples from the archives to come up
> with
> > a working solution. Here is the scenario:
> >
> > R2 --- (eth) --- R4 --- (tr) --- R3
> >
> > Let's start with R4 since it's the most complex. The first
> > step is to configure SRB and transparent bridging:
> >
> > no ip routing
> > !
> > source-bridge ring-group 100
> > !
> > int to0
> > source-bridge 10 5 100
> > !
> > int e0
> > bridge-group 1
> > !
> > bridge 1 protocol ieee
> >
> > Then, configure SR/TLB to bridge between the two interfaces:
> >
> > source-bridge transparent 100 200 5 1
> >
> > In that config, the first number is from the source-bridge
> ring-
> > group statement. The second number is the virtual ring
> number
> > that identifies the transparent bridging domain to the SRB
> > domain. The third number is the bridge number taken from
the
> > SRB config on the token ring interface. Finally, the
fourth
> > number is the bridge-group number taken from the ethernet
> > interface config.
> >
> > At this point things won't be working just yet. On R2, the
> > ethernet-only router, we simply need to configure an IP
> > address. Then, we need to add an IP address to R3 that's
in
> > the same subnet. Go ahead, try to ping...it won't work
yet,
> > and here's where it starts to get a little tricky if you're
> > doing this with IP.
> >
> > On R4 you've configured SR/TLB which handles layer-two
> traffic
> > just fine but it doesn't know how to handle embedded layer
> > three addresses. To fix this, add the following:
> >
> > bridge 1 bitswap-layer3-addresses
> >
> > That's fairly straightforward, but things aren't going to
> work
> > yet. If you try to ping R2 from R3, the initial ARP will
> > fail. Why? Because the router needs to send an explorer
and
> > it's not configured to do so. So, go to R3 and add the
> > following:
> >
> > int to0
> > source-bridge 10 4 200 (the 4 and 200 are irrelevant)
> > source-bridge spanning
> > multiring ip <------ important!
> >
> > Pings still won't work until you go back to the SR/TLB
router
> > and add 'source-bridge spanning' and 'multiring ip'. At
that
> > point, pings should succeed.
> >
> > With this solution there are no guarantees that all IP
> traffic
> > will work. In fact, this is configuration is probably a
> really
> > bad idea if you're running IP, but it at least sort of
> works.
> >
> > I broke this down into sections to show the steps I went
> > through to figure this out and make it work. Here are the
> > final working configs:
> >
> > R2 (ethernet):
> >
> > int ethernet0
> > ip address 172.16.43.2 255.255.255.0
> >
> > R3 (token ring):
> >
> > int tokenring0
> > ip add 172.16.43.3 255.255.255.0
> > source-bridge 10 4 200
> > source-bridge spanning
> > multiring ip
> >
> > R4 (SR/TLB):
> >
> > no ip routing
> > !
> > source-bridge ring-group 100
> > source-bridge transparent 100 200 5 1
> > !
> > int ethernet 0
> > bridge-group 1
> > !
> > int tokenring0
> > source-bridge 10 50 100
> > source-bridge spanning
> > multiring ip
> > !
> > bridge 1 protocol ieee
> > bridge 1 bitswap-layer3-addresses
> >
> > I currently have these exact configs on my routers, and
here
> is
> > the result:
> >
> > R3#
> > R3#sho arp
> > Protocol Address Age (min) Hardware Addr
Type
> > Interface
> > Internet 172.16.43.3 - 0000.30e2.cc0c
SNAP
> > TokenRing0
> > R3#ping 172.16.43.2
> >
> > Type escape sequence to abort.
> > Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 172.16.43.2, timeout is 2
> > seconds:
> > .!!!!
> > Success rate is 80 percent (4/5), round-trip min/avg/max =
> > 8/8/8 ms
> > R3#sho arp
> > Protocol Address Age (min) Hardware Addr
Type
> > Interface
> > Internet 172.16.43.3 - 0000.30e2.cc0c
SNAP
> > TokenRing0
> > Internet 172.16.43.2 0 0000.30b1.4bc1
SNAP
> > TokenRing0
> > R3#
> >
> > I sure hope I don't have to mess with this in the real lab,
> but
> > this little adventure was very enlightening. At least I
> think
> > I could get it working if I run into it when it counts. :-)
> >
> > Regards,
> > John
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:08 GMT-3