From: Jason Sinclair (sinclairj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Mar 14 2002 - 19:35:58 GMT-3
Hickito,
For direct encaps it is not the RIF that is passed-thru it is that the LLC2
frame is not locallly-acked and is acked via the remote end. Now when
talking about mapping the rules are as follows:
When using direct
Dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface serial 0 100 pass-thru ##### must
use frame-relay map dlsw 100
With lite
Dlsw remote-peer frame-relay interface serial 0 100 ######## must use
frame-relay map llc2 100
This is because when using light the data is reliably transported in LLC2.
With direct encaps it is transported via DLSW transport.
Let me know if you need more info.
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: Narvaez, Pablo [mailto:Pablo.Narvaez@getronics.com]
Sent: Friday, 15 March 2002 04:30
To: Jason Sinclair; A Yigit Zorlu; Bob Sinclair
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: DLSW direct encaps
Hey Guys, I was looking at the posts and couldn't get a
clear idea of DLSw Direct encap y Lite encap ..
I understand that Lite does local ack whereas Direct encap
let the RIF pass thru the link, right? ...
Now, regarding the configuration please correct me if wrong:
Direct encap:
dlsw local-peer peer-id 1.1.1.1
dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface serial 0 100
pass-thru
int ser 0
ip add 1.1.1.2 255.255.255.0
frame-relay map llc2 100 brodcast
Direct encap:
dlsw local-peer peer-id 1.1.1.1
dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface serial 0 100
int ser 0
ip add 1.1.1.2 255.255.255.0
frame-relay map llc2 100 brodcast
Is it that the only one difference between these two encap
modes is the keyword "pass-thru" in the end of the remote-peer
statement? ...
Aside from that, I have the option to use in the end of the
remote-peer the keyword "rif-pass-thru"? what is the difference
between "pass-thru" and "rif-pass-thru"? which should I use
to accomplish Direct and Lite encap?
And one more thing, in the interface I can use either:
frame-relay map llc2 or frame-relay dlsw .... what is the
"fr map dlsw" command for? and when should I use it? ...
Thanks in advance!!!
Cheers,
-hockito-
-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Sinclair [mailto:sinclairj@powertel.com.au]
Sent: Lunes, 11 de Marzo de 2002 05:02 p.m.
To: 'A Yigit Zorlu'; Jason Sinclair; 'Bob Sinclair'
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: DLSW direct encaps
Yigit,
You use it for the local-peer. Let's say you have an address
on your token
ring, loopback and serial int. You must use the local-peer
peer-id with the
address of the serial int NOT the loop or the token. I have
also verified
this behaviour with Cisco and they have concurred with these
findings. I
believe they are updating the doco appropriately.
Regards,
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: A Yigit Zorlu [mailto:alec_cisco@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, 11 March 2002 17:04
To: 'Jason Sinclair'; 'Bob Sinclair'
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: DLSW direct encaps
Jason,
I am confused. Where do you use ip address in direct
encapsulation ?
Please check :
o Dlsw local-peer
o dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface
serial 0 100
pass-thru
o interface serial 0
o frame-relay map dlsw 100 br
Yigit
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com
[mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf
Of
Jason Sinclair
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 3:15 AM
To: 'Bob Sinclair'; Jason Sinclair
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: DLSW direct encaps
Bob,
Direct must be point to point. When using direct you
must also use
the IP
address on the serial int NOT a loopback or a
token/ether, etc. I am
not
sure why, but from my testing the remote side must
ack the frames
and thus
when you use any int that is not the directly
connected int, the L2
frame is
then routed to the next int. That is also why only
p2p works I
guess!
Remember with DLSW Lite this does not matter as the
frame is locally
acknowledged. This is only an issue when using the
pass-thru
command.
I have some dynamic peer stuff that works. Basically
dynamic peer
circuits
and the peer connection are only brought up when
there is traffic
destined
for the remote side (I guess that is fairly
obvious). I have had
success
doing this when using a dest-mac statement under the
remote-peer as
you can
better control the dynamic peer. Some configs are as
follows which
create a
host and a FEP and also two DLSW routers runnning
dynamic over HDLC.
Nothing
fancy, I am not using loopbacks just the serial
ints.
When you start it up the peers will connect and 2
circuits will
establish.
If you shut the token on HostA, the circuits will
drop and after 20
minutes
the peers will disconnect. You can drop this timer
if that is too
long. Also
as I have specified the dest-mac, the peers will
only establish for
this
address as dynamic peers only establish after all
filter rules are
met.
Also remember to bit-swap the mac addresses on the
host or FEP if
you are
doing token to ether as you are statically defining
the remote mac
and dlsw
will not swap it for you in this instance.
Let me know if you have any trouble using this or
have other DLSW
questions.
I am at work right now and can't access my home lab,
but if you have
any
problems I will re-create tonight. This is all from
the top of my
head at
the moment!!
HostA-------tokenring---------DLSWA--------serial--------DLSWB--------tokenr
ing----------FEP
HostA (PU2)
dspu host PU2 xid-snd 01712345 rmac 4000.1111.0001
rsap 4 lsap 4
retry-timeout 5
!
dspu host PU3 xid-snd 01712345 rmac 4000.1111.0001
rsap 8 lsap 8
retry-timeout 5
!
interface TokenRing0
mac-address 4000.3000.0002
no ip address
ring-speed 16
dspu enable-host lsap 4
dspu enable-host lsap 8
dspu start PU2
dspu start PU3
DLSWA
Dlsw local-peer peer-id 1.1.1.1
Dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 1.1.1.2 dynamic inactivity 20
dest-mac
4000.1111.0001
!
Int s0
Ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.252
DLSWB
Dlsw local-peer peer-id 1.1.1.2 promiscuous
!
int s0
ip address 1.1.1.2 255.255.255.252
clock rate 64000
FEP(PU4)
dspu pu PU2 xid-rcv 01712345
!
dspu pu PU3 xid-rcv 01712345
!
interface TokenRing0
mac-address 4000.1111.0001
no ip address
ring-speed 16
dspu enable-pu lsap 4
dspu enable-pu lsap 8
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: Bob Sinclair
[mailto:bsin@erols.com]
Sent: Monday, 11 March 2002 09:03
To: Jason Sinclair
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: DLSW direct
encaps
Jason,
Since you have some experience with
this, maybe you
could
confirm my understanding. Is it true that direct
encapsulation over
frame
relay is only point-point. I don't mean subif type,
but that if you
had a
hub and spoke configuration, one could not do direct
encap spoke to
spoke.
Does that sound right?
Also, do you have a working config
for dynamic
peers? I
have not been able to get this to work or to find a
good example.
Thanks
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason Sinclair"
<sinclairj@powertel.com.au>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2002 6:24 PM
Subject: DLSW direct encaps
> All,
>
> FYI - direct encapsulation over
frame relay with
IETF does
not work in any
> version of IOS from 12.0 - 12.2
(don't know about
before).
It works fine
> with Cisco encaps however. I spent
three days
playing with
this and in the
> end using a frame analyser and
debug frame packet
you see
that DLSW
> manipulates the IETF frame to the
point where it
has an
"ILLEGA:" value in
> it. Just thought this might be
interesting to
someone.
>
> Regards,
>
> PS - I have the debug output if
anyone wants it.
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
**********************************************************************
> PowerTel Limited, winners of
> Broadband Wholesale Carrier of the
year,
CommsWorld
Telecomms Awards 2001
> Best Emerging Telco, Australian
Telecom Awards
2001
>
>
**********************************************************************
> This email (including all
attachments) is intended
solely
for the named
> addressee. It is confidential and
may contain
commercially
sensitive
> information. If you receive it in
error, please
let us
know by reply email,
> delete it from your system and
destroy any copies.
>
> This email is also subject to
copyright. No part
of it
should be reproduced,
> adapted or transmitted without the
prior written
consent
of the copyright owner.
>
> Emails may be interfered with, may
contain
computer
viruses or other defects
> and may not be successfully
replicated on other
systems.
We give no
> warranties in relation to these
matters. If you
have any
doubts about
> the authenticity of an email
purportedly sent by
us,
please contact us
> immediately.
>
>
**********************************************************************
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:09 GMT-3