From: Anthony Pace (anthonypace@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Jul 23 2002 - 00:26:43 GMT-3
wrong thread. sorry. There was anohter one where the Interface/next hop
was being discussed as it pertained to "showing up in the ip table".
Anthony Pace
On Sat, 20 Jul 2002 02:43:32 -0700, "Brian Dennis" <brian@5g.net> said:
> They both show up. That's not the issue. Read the thread from the
> beginning and you'll see that it was never brought up.
>
> Brian Dennis, CCIE #2210 (R&S/ISP Dial)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Anthony Pace
> Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 4:30 PM
> To: Brian Dennis; 'Groupstudy'
> Subject: RE: Default route over ISDN
>
> Why are we assuming that a route to a next hop shows up in the IP
> routing table and a route to an interface does not? They both show up
> unless there is another identical route with a lower AD. How does the
> "interface vs. layer3 address" play into wheather or not the route is
> "hidden" or wheather it jumps into the IP routeing table?
>
> Anthony Pace
>
>
>
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2002 19:46:52 -0700, "Brian Dennis" <brian@5g.net> said:
> > Mamoor,
> > The idea was to illustrate how a static route worked when pointed to
> an
> > interface as opposed to an IP address. I through in the dialer map
> part
> > just to point out that the issue isn't technically with the static
> > route
> > but is a layer 3 to layer 2 mapping issue.
> >
> > Also I think that a proctor would call that a default route in the
> > actual CCIE lab ;-)
> >
> > Brian Dennis, CCIE #2210 (R&S/ISP Dial)
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ahmed Mamoor Amimi [mailto:mamoor@ieee.org]
> > Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 8:20 PM
> > To: Brian Dennis; 'Yakout Esmat'; 'Groupstudy'
> > Subject: Re: Default route over ISDN
> >
> > Yes that also worked for me .... but this is actually not a default
> > route.
> > this is some sort of static route create with the dialer-map and that
> > default route will only work for that ip address that is mapped not
> for
> > others.
> > The way around in this will be the dialer string.
> >
> >
> > -Mamoor
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Brian Dennis <brian@5g.net>
> > To: 'Ahmed Mamoor Amimi' <mamoor@ieee.org>; 'Yakout Esmat'
> > <yesmat@iprimus.com.au>; 'Groupstudy' <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 6:39 AM
> > Subject: RE: Default route over ISDN
> >
> >
> > > Mamoor,
> > > Did you actually try this in a lab and verify that it didn't work?
> > Works
> > > in my lab. See below.
> > >
> > > Brian Dennis, CCIE #2210 (R&S/ISP Dial)
> > >
> > >
> > > <R2>
> > > interface BRI0
> > > ip address 192.168.1.2 255.255.255.0
> > > dialer map ip 10.1.1.1 2029
> > > dialer map ip 192.168.1.6 broadcast 2029
> > > dialer-group 1
> > > isdn switch-type basic-ni
> > > isdn spid1 2028
> > > !
> > > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 BRI0
> > > !
> > > dialer-list 1 protocol ip permit
> > > !
> > > </R2>
> > >
> > > <R6>
> > > interface Loopback0
> > > ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.0
> > > !
> > > interface BRI0
> > > ip address 192.168.1.6 255.255.255.0
> > > dialer map ip 192.168.1.2 broadcast 2028
> > > dialer-group 1
> > > isdn switch-type basic-ni
> > > isdn spid1 2029
> > > !
> > > dialer-list 1 protocol ip permit
> > > </6>
> > >
> > > R2#ping 10.1.1.1
> > >
> > > Type escape sequence to abort.
> > > Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.1.1.1, timeout is 2 seconds:
> > > !!!!!
> > > Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 36/36/40
> > ms
> > > R2#
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> > Of
> > > Ahmed Mamoor Amimi
> > > Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 6:47 PM
> > > To: Yakout Esmat; Brian Dennis; 'Groupstudy'
> > > Subject: Re: Default route over ISDN
> > >
> > > it will not work either that way by putting the map in local. u
> surely
> > > need
> > > to use the dialer profile or use dialer string if pointing to the
> bri
> > > interface
> > >
> > > -Mamoor
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: Yakout Esmat <yesmat@iprimus.com.au>
> > > To: Brian Dennis <brian@5g.net>; 'Groupstudy'
> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 5:10 AM
> > > Subject: RE: Default route over ISDN
> > >
> > >
> > > > Brian,
> > > >
> > > > I see the logic behind it, and am sure that if I put another
> mapping
> > > > statement in there it should work, I will try that and post the
> > > results.
> > > >
> > > > Or maybe if I use dialer string instead of dialer map.
> > > >
> > > > CHeers
> > > > yakout
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Brian Dennis [mailto:brian@5g.net]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 5:51 AM
> > > > To: 'Yakout esmat'; 'Groupstudy'
> > > > Subject: RE: Default route over ISDN
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Think about it like this. If you tell the router using the "ip
> route
> > > > 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 bri0" command that all networks that aren't
> > explicitly
> > > > in the routing table are directly connected to BRI0, why would you
> > > > expect the router to send them to 192.168.1.1?
> > > >
> > > > With the default route pointing to the interface the router wants
> to
> > > > send the packet directly to address 10.1.1.1 (the packet's
> > > destination).
> > > > Since you don't have a dialer map to the 10.1.1.1 address you are
> > > > getting the encapsulation failed messages. When you point the
> > default
> > > to
> > > > the 192.168.1.1 address the router uses the 192.168.1.1 dialer map
> > to
> > > > get to it. As a side note you could also put a dialer map to the
> > > > 10.1.1.1 address and you would have been able to ping it with the
> > > > default route pointing to the BRI0 interface.
> > > >
> > > > What I recommend you doing is getting a "sniffer" and doing this
> on
> > an
> > > > Ethernet network. Try pointing a static route to an interface and
> > try
> > > > pointing a static route to an IP address of another router. You'll
> > be
> > > > able to see the difference in who the router ARPs for.
> > > >
> > > > Brian Dennis, CCIE #2210 (R&S/ISP Dial)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
> Behalf
> > > Of
> > > > Yakout esmat
> > > > Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 7:01 AM
> > > > To: Groupstudy
> > > > Subject: Default route over ISDN
> > > >
> > > > Any body aware of this problem..
> > > >
> > > > Scenario:
> > > >
> > > > 10.1.1.1/24--[R1]------(192.168.1.0/24)-----[R2]----
> > > > ISDN
> > > >
> > > > 1) R2 is configured with a static default route
> > > >
> > > > Problem:
> > > >
> > > > 1) If the default static route on R2 is pointing to BRI0 interface
> > "ip
> > > > route
> > > > 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 bri0", R2 can't ping 10.1.1.1 on R1. Getting
> > > > "encapsulation
> > > > failed" error when debuging ip packets, and R2 can't initiate a
> > dial.
> > > >
> > > > 2) If I cahnge the default to point to next hop instead "ip route
> > > > 0.0.0.0
> > > > 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1", every thing is sweet
> > > >
> > > > IOS 12.1, legacy ISDN with single dialer map statement is used, IP
> > > > classless
> > > > is on...
> > > >
> > > > I must be missing some thing.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > Yakout
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:36:39 GMT-3