From: Jake (jakeczyz@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Jun 23 2002 - 16:55:02 GMT-3
Mas,
I could be wrong, but I recall that there was an issue with using P2P connectio
ns between
a p2p sub on one end and a physical on the other end. As I recall, there was a
problem
establishing OSPF neighbor relationships (no, not related to the network type)
and it
required a map statement on the physical side only. I don't remember if I could
still
ping, and very likely I'm mis-remembering this totally... but I'm sure someone
in the
group knows what I'm talking about if it exists. Please correct me if I'm wrong
, I don't
have sufficient motivation to test this on the eqipment sitting behind me. ;-)
Thanks,
Jake
9102
P.S. Is "Mas" short for Masutatsu? j/w (Used to train Kyokushin)
--- P729 <p729@cox.net> wrote:
> You should use the 'frame-relay interface-dlci' command for assigning the
> DLCI to the local end of your point-to-point "connection." 'frame-relay map'
> is used on multipoint interfaces to map destination layer 3 addresses to
> local DLCIs. Maps aren't needed on P2P connections because there is only one
> "other end" on a P2P connection, whereas on a multipoint connection there
> may be several and the router needs a means to know how to get where.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mas Kato
> https://ecardfile.com/id/mkato
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Lance" <Lance@advnetech.com>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2002 2:00 PM
> Subject: Frame maps and Interface-dlci
>
>
> > If you have a point-to-point frame connections between two routers should
> you
> > use the frame map or the interface-dlci command?
> > From the perspecitve of the lab is one correct and the other wrong? I
> know
> > that they both work, however there has been some discussion on the what
> > consitutes a correct configuration.
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> > Lance
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 02 2002 - 08:12:40 GMT-3