From: Sandro Ciffali (sandyccie@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Mar 17 2002 - 11:34:16 GMT-3
Both will produce same result, Going forward cisco will not support
secondary addresses, Hence subinterface is more strategic solution.
Sandro
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ahmed Mamoor Amimi" <mamoor@ieee.org>
To: "Shadi" <ccie@investorsgrp.com>; "ccielab" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2002 7:27 AM
Subject: Re: IPX encapsulation and subintefaces?
> both will product the same result
>
> my 0.0002 cents
>
> -Mamoor
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Shadi <ccie@investorsgrp.com>
> To: ccielab <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2002 4:04 PM
> Subject: IPX encapsulation and subintefaces?
>
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have seen in the CCIe Boot camp 17 that they are doing subinterface on
> > router 14 to support the network 1408 novell-ether encapsulation and
1404
> ARPA
> > encapsulation
> >
> > int f0/0.1
> > ipx netw 1408
> > enc novell-ether
> >
> > int f0/0.2
> > ipx netw 1404
> > enc Arpa
> >
> > my solution was:
> >
> > int f0/0
> > ipx netw 1408 enc novell-ether
> > Ipx netw 1404 enc arpa secondary
> >
> > Is that right and can give me the same result the the right config, or
am
> I
> > missing something here?
> >
> >
> > Shadi
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:11 GMT-3