From: tria_ka@gmx.net
Date: Thu Mar 13 2003 - 03:40:45 GMT-3
Hi,
> Hi, why don't you use the dlsw backup peer ?
in the question is forbidden
>
> R1
> dlsw local-peer peer-id 10.1.1.1
> dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 10.1.1.2
> dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 10.1.1.3 backup-peer 10.1.1.2
>
> On Sunday, Feb 16, 2003, at 19:07 Asia/Taipei, Ali Fahmi wrote:
>
> > Hi All, I have topology like this,
> > R2----|
> > (VlanA)-R1 -------- F/R claud ------| |(VLanB)
> > R3 ---|
> >
> >
> >
> > Configure dlsw on R1, R2 and R3, VLAN A can comunicate to VLAN B, R1
> > should prefer R2, dont use cost or backup peer,
> > Does dlsw redundancy is a best mothode to achieve this requirement ?
> >
> > Is config below right ?
> >
> > R1
> > dlsw local-peer peer-id 10.1.1.1
> > dlsw bridge-group 1
> > dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 10.1.1.2
> > dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 10.1.1.3
> >
> > bridge 1 protocol ieee
> >
> > interface E0
> > bridge-group 1
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > R2
> > dlsw local-peer peer-id 10.1.1.2 prom
> >
> > interface E0
> > dlsw transparent redundancy-enable 9999.9999.9999 master-priority 10
why you use this mac-address ? is it given ? or how do you know what mac you
sgould use ?
udo
-- +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ Bitte ldcheln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 05 2003 - 08:51:38 GMT-3