From: Anthony Pace (anthonypace@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Jul 11 2002 - 17:14:20 GMT-3
don't secondaries on FAstethernet mean separeate VLANS where
secondaries are multiple networks on the same wire?
Anthony PAce
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002 10:38:15 +1000, "Nick Shah" <nshah@connect.com.au>
said:
> it certainly becomes impossible ...
>
> Broadcast is taken into assumption, with the introduction of vlans it
> does
> become less possible to implement what we have done (I think it doesnt
> work
> on Fa interfaces).
>
> However within a single vlan, it can still work (use secondary
> addresses, if
> they are still supported in future)
>
> Nick
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Anthony Pace" <anthonypace@fastmail.fm>
> To: "Nick Shah" <nshah@connect.com.au>; "Prakash H Somani"
> <pdsccie@rediffmail.com>
> Cc: "Todd Carswell" <acarswell@nc.rr.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2002 9:48 AM
> Subject: Re: Re: IPX EIGRP Autonomous System Discovery -- Is it
> possible?
>
>
> > Thank you for this answer. Then if your job is to determine what
> > networks have evolved or mutated over the years, on a network you
> > encountered, you would put dummy network numbers and all possible
> > encaps. Then you would sit back an watch the debugs to draw your
> > picture of what network(s) exist on the big broadcast domain. I would
> > think secondaries on the untagged ethernet interface would be most
> > likely to suceed. If you introduce the possiblity of multiple VLANS and
> > IPX networks doesn't this become impossible?
> >
> > Anthony Pace
> >
> > On Wed, 10 Jul 2002 12:14:03 +1000, "Nick Shah" <nshah@connect.com.au>
> > said:
> > >
> > >
> > > > What is IPX NETWORK DISCOVERY? IS it a way to have an interface
> > > > synamically gain an IPX network number?
> > >
> > > Its a way to "figure out" the ipx network number of the other end, you
> > > have
> > > to figure it out without doing a show on that other end, assuming you
> > > have
> > > no administrative control over the other end. That other end could be a
> > > server or a router.
> > >
> > > > Also, If you use sub-interfaces instead of secondaries to support
> > > > different encapsulations and your media is Ethernet, does this mean
> you
> > > > need to create multiple VLANs for each sub-interace and segrate the A1
> > > > network onto one "wire" and the B2 network onto another "wire"?
> > >
> > > Not in this case. Basically the idea is that by putting all possible
> > > encapsulations on subifs (or secondary networks) is that any one
> > > encapsulation has to match the other end, and hence will "trigger" a
> > > response (in terms of matching or not matching network). So assume that
> > > the
> > > ethernet interface is directly connected to the Server/router/other
> > > end.
> > >
> > > However, your Q does raise interesting observation. If the other end
> > > belongs
> > > to a different VLAN, and you dont have isl/dot1q encapsulation
> > > configured on
> > > ur end (including correct vlan), there is not an iota of chance to do
> > > "network discovery".
> > >
> > > You can also have 5 routers connected on a broadcast medium and have
> > > each
> > > running different encaps, and one of the main router (whcih needs to
> > > speak
> > > with eveyrone else) can run multiple encaps/multiple networks)
> > >
> > > > If this were a lab I would say that would work but in real life the
> > > > reason you might need one wore to have different networks and
> > > > encapsulations because several were allready on one wire. Is this
> there
> > > > a way to do the sub-interfaces where it is all still one big "wire"?
> > >
> > > Once again, this is needed only to figure out the other end. Once you
> > > have
> > > found the network on the other end, just configure it with the right
> > > encapsulation (get rid of the others, they are put in only to discover
> > > the
> > > network)
> > >
> > >
> > > On another note, the behaviour is flaky, meaning I (including some
> > > other
> > > people) couldnt get it to work at first try ( I just tried once). I
> > > will try
> > > it on another set of routers running a different variant of ios.
> > >
> > > rgds
> > > Nick
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 9 Jul 2002 15:15:43 -0000, "Prakash H Somani"
> > > > <pdsccie@rediffmail.com> said:
> > > > > Hi Nick....
> > > > >
> > > > > It works....find
> > > > >
> > > > > A. Debug output
> > > > >
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:09:29.498: IPXRIP: Marking network 222 FFFFFFFF for
> > > > > Flash Update
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:09:29.502: IPXRIP: General Query
> > > > > src=222.00b0.64db.be20, dst=222.ffff
> > > > > .ffff.ffff, packet sent (via Ethernet0/0)
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:09:29.510: IPXRIP: positing flash update to
> > > > > 22.ffff.ffff.ffff via Loo
> > > > > pback0 (broadcast)
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:09:29.510: IPXRIP: positing flash update to
> > > > > 222.ffff.ffff.ffff via Et
> > > > > hernet0/0 (broadcast)
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:09:29.514: IPXRIP: positing full update to
> > > > > 222.ffff.ffff.ffff via Eth
> > > > > ernet0/0 (broadcast)
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:09:29.566: IPX:
> > > > > Lo0:22.0002.0002.0002->22.ffff.ffff.ffff ln= 40 tc=00
> > > > > pt=01 ds=0453 ss=0453, rcvd
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:09:29.566: IPX:
> > > > > Lo0:22.0002.0002.0002->22.ffff.ffff.ffff ln= 40 tc=00
> > > > > pt=01 ds=0453 ss=0453, bad pkt
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:09:29.566: IPXRIP: suppressing null update to
> > > > > 222.ffff.ffff.ffff (Eth
> > > > > ernet0/0)
> > > > > R2(config-if)#
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:10:14.928: IPX:
> > > > > Et0/0:5.00d0.58ad.27f1->5.ffff.ffff.ffff ln= 40 tc=00
> > > > > pt=01 ds=0453 ss=0453, rcvd
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:10:14.928: IPX:
> > > > > Et0/0:5.00d0.58ad.27f1->5.ffff.ffff.ffff ln= 40 tc=00
> > > > > pt=01 ds=0453 ss=0453, bad pkt
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:10:27.429: IPXRIP: positing full update to
> > > > > 22.ffff.ffff.ffff via Loop
> > > > > back0 (broadcast)
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:10:27.437: IPX:
> > > > > Lo0:22.0002.0002.0002->22.ffff.ffff.ffff ln= 40 tc=00
> > > > > pt=01 ds=0453 ss=0453, rcvd
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:10:27.437: IPX:
> > > > > Lo0:22.0002.0002.0002->22.ffff.ffff.ffff ln= 40 tc=00
> > > > > pt=01 ds=0453 ss=0453, bad pkt
> > > > > *Mar 6 04:10:29.348: IPXRIP: positing full update to
> > > > > 222.ffff.ffff.ffff via Eth
> > > > > ernet0/0 (broadcast)
> > > > >
> > > > > B. Configuration details
> > > > >
> > > > > R5#sh runn int e0
> > > > > Building configuration...
> > > > >
> > > > > Current configuration:
> > > > > !
> > > > > interface Ethernet0
> > > > > ip address 150.50.50.2 255.255.255.240 secondary
> > > > > ip address 172.16.45.5 255.255.255.248
> > > > > no ip directed-broadcast
> > > > > no ip split-horizon eigrp 100
> > > > > ipx network 5 encapsulation SAP
> > > > > end
> > > > >
> > > > > R2#sh run int e0/0
> > > > > Building configuration...
> > > > >
> > > > > Current configuration:
> > > > > !
> > > > > interface Ethernet0/0
> > > > > ip address 172.16.45.2 255.255.255.248
> > > > > no ip directed-broadcast
> > > > > ipx network 222 encapsulation SAP
> > > > > end
> > > > >
> > > > > regards....Prakash
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 09 Jul 2002 Nick Shah wrote :
> > > > > >There was a post in the archives, which allowed for a method
> > > > > >(coupled with
> > > > > >debug ip packet) to find the IP EIGRP AS ##, but nothing that I
> > > > > >know of for
> > > > > >IPX eigrp.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Btw, I juggled (read struggled :) a bit trying to get the ipx
> > > > > >network
> > > > > >discovery.. I tried the following but somehow couldnt get it to
> > > > > >work...
> > > > > >
> > > > > >* create sub-ifs with different encapsulations, and assign
> > > > > >different ipx
> > > > > >networks to it
> > > > > >* turn on debug ipx sap , debug ipx packet, debug ipx routing (I
> > > > > >think)
> > > > > >*but it showed me everything except what I wanted (bad IPX
> > > > > >network etc.
> > > > > >etc.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I used secondary ipx addresses (in lieu of sub interfaces), used
> > > > > >ipx eigrp,
> > > > > >ipx rip & even NLSP.. but no luck..
> > > > > >
> > > > > >rgds
> > > > > >Nick
> > > > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Todd Carswell" <acarswell@nc.rr.com>
> > > > > >To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > > >Sent: Tuesday, July 09, 2002 1:23 PM
> > > > > >Subject: IPX EIGRP Autonomous System Discovery -- Is it
> > > > > >possible?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I can do IPX NETWORK discovery. It made me wonder...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is it possible to discover a neighboring IPX EIGRP Autonomous
> > > > > >System
> > > > > >Number?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thx
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Todd Carswell
> > > > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:36:26 GMT-3