From: Carl Phelan (carlphelan@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Mar 31 2002 - 18:14:48 GMT-3
I would agree with not including the source-bridge statement on the
non-TR enabled router however I see they have included this command in
the 'CCIE Lab Practice Kit' on page 367. I do not think it would affect
the function of bridging between the routers but would it be a minus
point in the lab to use it?
Regards,
Carl
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Mas Kato
Sent: 31 March 2002 17:22
To: l.fitts@mindspring.com
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: DLSw+ Translation between Eth and TR
[demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text]
Landon,
'dlsw bridge-group' is all that is required on routerA. As an aside, you
may also want to familiarize yourself with any canonical/non-canonical
address issues between the differing media types.
Regards,
Mas Kato
https://ecardfile.com/id/mkato
> "Landon Fitts" <l.fitts@mindspring.com> <ccielab@groupstudy.com> DLSw+
Translation between Eth and TRDate: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 23:40:26 -0500
>Reply-To: "Landon Fitts" <l.fitts@mindspring.com>
>
>DLSw gurus, I have a question for you.
>
>Is the "source-bridge ring-group" command required on routerA in this
>example or is the "dlsw bridge-group" all that is required?
>
>e0---rtrA---s0---rtrB---e0
> |
> t0
>
>
>On routerB I know that these commands are required:
>source-bridge ring-group 500
>source-bridge transparent 500 100 1 5
>dlsw bridge-group 5
>
>Regards,
>
>Landon Fitts
>CCNP, CCDP, NNCSE, NNCDE
>l.fitts@mindspring.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:27 GMT-3