From: Peng Zheng (zpnist@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Aug 20 2002 - 17:50:29 GMT-3
It's very clear. Thanks for all replys.
--- Fred Ingham <fingham@cox.net> wrote:
> The internal network numbers should be unique but
> the network numbers can
> also be different. The master (higher internal
> network number) will
> determine the actual network number used in ipxwan
> exchanges. The network
> numbers chosen can be any valid network numbers but
> must also be unique in
> the network.
>
> In the CCO example CHICAGO has the higher internal
> network number (6666) so
> the network 100 will be used in the ipxwan packet
> exchanges.
>
> HTH, Fred
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <ted.mcdermott@exeloncorp.com>
> To: <zpnist@yahoo.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 1:07 PM
> Subject: RE: IPXWAN config
>
>
> > Peng,
> >
> > The internal network, 6666, should be unique from
> the NYC-AS internal
> > network number, 1000. I don't understand, however,
> why one side has
> external
> > network 100 while the other is 101. I believe
> these should be equal!
> >
> > Ted
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Peng Zheng [mailto:zpnist@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2002 3:07 AM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: IPXWAN config
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm not understand this:
> > under:
> >
>
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/atip
> > x_r/ipx/2rdipx2.htm#xtocid23
> >
> > There is some config like this:
> >
> > interface serial 1
> > no ipx network
> > encapsulation ppp
> > ipx ipxwan 6666 100 CHICAGO-AS
> >
> >
> > On the remote router (NYC-AS):
> >
> > interface serial 0
> > no ipx network
> > encapsulation ppp
> > ipx ipxwan 1000 101 NYC-AS
> >
> >
> > I don't understand the network-number part,
> shouldn't
> > these values on the two routers be same? If I do
> not
> > use unnumbered, how should I choose the value for
> both
> > routers?
> >
> > Thank you for help.
> >
> > Best Wishes,
> > Peng Zheng
> >
> >
> >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:48:31 GMT-3