From: cannonr (cannonr@attbi.com)
Date: Fri Feb 07 2003 - 00:49:24 GMT-3
Post config's if you have them. I'm sure someone here can help. Do you
have a dialer map statement for the watched network as well as the remote
BRI IP address? They are both necessary.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nelson Herron" <nelsonrherron@earthlink.net>
To: "MADMAN" <dave@interprise.com>; <changjoe@earthlink.net>
Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: ISDN: Back up interface - Which do you prefer?
> I have heard this alledged. I have not been able to get dialer watch to
> work on a pair of NP-4Bs. If I use the config in Solie's book, it comes
up
> and never goes down (more or less) and if I change my dial-list to use an
> access list containing:
>
> access-list 101 permit eigrp any any
> access-list 101 permit tcp any any
>
> it won't come up unless I ping the other end of the ISDN link, then it
times
> out ordinarily. When I plug/unplug the serial link that provides the
normal
> connection I get the dialer announcements under "debug dialer event", but
it
> does not seem to actually interact with the bri 0. When I have a "dialer
> map ip" for the watch address included in the config, the routing table
> always shows the watch address as learned through the bri 0 (connected)
> even if I have the serial link up. If I pull that "dialer map ip" then
the
> link shows up as learned normally when the serial line is live and it
shows
> up properly when I initiate the ISDN connection with a ping and the serial
> line is down. However, I get the missing map message as part of the
"debug
> dialer events" output. Have you any guesses short of looking at a hundred
> pages of configs and debugs? I have posted it to the professional page
but
> no takers yet - of course I posted the wrong config/debug the first time,
> which makes me look and feel like an idiot. But that is the way it
happens.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Nelson Herron
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "MADMAN" <dave@interprise.com>
> To: "Joe Chang" <changjoe@earthlink.net>
> Cc: "sam" <sam@avtechusa.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 1:00 PM
> Subject: Re: ISDN: Back up interface - Which do you prefer?
>
>
> > Another nice feature of dialer watch is that it will initiate the
> > call without requiring an interesting packet which was a requirement I
> > recently ran into.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > Joe Chang wrote:
> > > Sam, the methods you listed serve different purposes.
> > >
> > > OSPF demand-circuit and ODR allow protocol neighbors to maintain
> relations
> > > without hello PDUs, allowing ISDN links to time out and disconnect.
> > >
> > > Dialer watch and floating statics trigger calls when specific routes
> > > disappear. Dialer watch can keep the ISDN link from timing out while
the
> > > routes are still missing, so it is more appealing than a floating
> static.
> > >>From my personal experience and from recent discussions dialer watch
> behaves
> > > differently than the first assumptions of many people:
> > >
> > > http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/129/bri-backup-map-watch.html
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "MADMAN" <dave@interprise.com>
> > > To: "sam" <sam@avtechusa.com>
> > > Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 3:48 PM
> > > Subject: Re: ISDN: Back up interface - Which do you prefer?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> Yes floating static route. Of coarse this is not suitable for all
> > >>situations but for the majority it works perfectly well and is simple.
> > >>
> > >> Dave
> > >>
> > >>sam wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>Hey all, I appreciate your time taken to read this.
> > >>>
> > >>>It is my understanding that there are several methods that can be
used
> > >>>to configure an On-Demand ISDN line as a backup.
> > >>>In particular,
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>- OSPF demand-circuit to suppress OSPF hello-packets
> > >>>- EIGRP on-demand-routing (ODR) using CDP to halt EIGRP
> routing
> > >>>updates keeping link alive
> > >>>- Dialer Watch Group used to monitor specific routes instead
> of
> > >>>an interface
> > >>>
> > >>>I can understand different methods deployed if you use different
> routing
> > >>>protocols, but are there any advantages to any method, or a preferred
> > >>>style that you might use? Any other methods you find desirable?
> > >>>
> > >>>TIA!
> > >>>
> > >>>Sam Sena
> > >>>Avtech Technologies
> > >>>4500 New Brunswick Ave
> > >>>Piscataway NJ
> > >>>(732) 424-8008 (o)
> > >>>(732) 424-7388 (f)
> > >>>.
> > >>
> > >>--
> > >>David Madland
> > >>CCIE# 2016
> > >>Sr. Network Engineer
> > >>Qwest Communications
> > >>612-664-3367
> > >>
> > >>"You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer." --Winston
> > >>Churchill
> > >>.
> > --
> > David Madland
> > CCIE# 2016
> > Sr. Network Engineer
> > Qwest Communications
> > 612-664-3367
> >
> > "You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer." --Winston
> > Churchill
> > .
> .
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Mar 01 2003 - 11:06:14 GMT-3