From: ccie2be (ccie2be@nyc.rr.com)
Date: Sat Nov 15 2003 - 16:00:19 GMT-3
Hmmm, that's very interesting. Very strange but interesting. Anyone know
why that is?
----- Original Message -----
From: "seonghui" <seonghui@vads.com>
To: "'ccie2be'" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 1:43 PM
Subject: RE: OSPF - MTU mismatch
> Hi ccie2b,
>
> i believe the default MTU for cat3550 is 1500. If you do a delete
vlan.dat,
> MTU size will change to 1504. I had this problem when i was preparing for
my
> lab exam. Thanks to scott and matijevic for helping me to solve the
problem.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ccie2be [mailto:ccie2be@nyc.rr.com]
> Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2003 2:35 AM
> To: matijevi@bellsouth.net; seonghui; 'Silvio Nunes';
> ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: OSPF - MTU mismatch
>
>
> Thanks for getting back to me on this. However, I was more concerned with
> the fact that by default, the MTU size on the Cat 3550 is different than
the
> default MTU size on Cisco routers. I was aware that the MTU size on OSPF
> neighbors need to match for an adjacency to form as the link you provided
> proved. However, the example, in the link shows that on one router the
MTU
> size had been manually changed from it's default setting.
>
> In the originial question, there was a problem because the default MTU on
> the Cat is different than the default MTU size on the router.
>
> This leads to the obvious question of why the Cat 3550 has a different
> default MTU size than Cisco routers?
>
> Another question is what other potential problems lay in wait because of
> this different default MTU size?
>
> I would think that if Cisco decided to have a different default MTU size
on
> the Cat 3550 compared with it's routers, there's probably a reason for
that
> and since this will cause problems, at least with OSPF, this difference
> would be well documented. Furthermore, I would expect that Cisco would
> highlight those features and functions that depended on the MTU size
> matching between the Cat 3550 and routers, since those features won't work
> if the MTU size isn't manually changed.
>
> Form a lab point of view, I just think it would be good to have a list of
> those features/functions that require the MTU size to be manually changed
so
> that if something isn't working one would know to wonder if this problem
is
> a result of a MTU mismatch.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <matijevi@bellsouth.net>
> To: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>; "seonghui" <seonghui@vads.com>;
"'Silvio
> Nunes'" <silvio_98@hotmail.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 12:55 PM
> Subject: Re: OSPF - MTU mismatch
>
>
> > Hello CCIE2be,
> > This is documented on Cisco's web site, I also believe it is documented
in
> > Doyle vol1 book. This problem has also been discussed before on
> Groupstudy,
> > search the archives and I am sure you can find it. Here is the link on
> > cisco's website:
> >
>
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/tk480/technologies_tech_note09186a0080
> 093f0d.shtml
> > Sincerely,
> > Matijevic
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
> > To: "seonghui" <seonghui@vads.com>; "'Silvio Nunes'"
> > <silvio_98@hotmail.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 12:37 PM
> > Subject: Re: OSPF - MTU mismatch
> >
> >
> > > I've checked the 3550 documentation and didn't see anything regarding
> the
> > > need to change MTU for OSPF or any other routing protocol for
> adjacencies
> > to
> > > properly form. Is this problem specific MTU size documented anywhere
or
> > is
> > > this something that you had best just know.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "seonghui" <seonghui@vads.com>
> > > To: "'Silvio Nunes'" <silvio_98@hotmail.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:24 AM
> > > Subject: RE: OSPF - MTU mismatch
> > >
> > >
> > > > global command --> system MTU 1500
> > > >
> > > > follow by a reload
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf
Of
> > > > Silvio Nunes
> > > > Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2003 11:06 PM
> > > > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > Subject: OSPF - MTU mismatch
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Group,
> > > >
> > > > When I try to establish an relationship between Interface Vlan1 (Cat
> > 3550)
> > > > and Ethernet0 (R1) in OSPF, the relationship can not be form because
> the
> > > MTU
> > > > is different:
> > > > Interface Vlan1 - MTU Size 1504 bytes
> > > > Ethernet 0 - MTU Size 1500 butes
> > > >
> > > > When I put the command IP OSPF IGNORE-MTU for each interface,
> everything
> > > > works fine.
> > > >
> > > > Is there another way to do the same thing ?
> > > >
> > > > Considering that there is not the command MTU xx for interface
Vlan..
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > MSN Messenger: converse com os seus amigos online.
> > > > http://messenger.msn.com.br
> > > >
> > > >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > > > Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials
> from:
> > > > http://shop.groupstudy.com
> > > >
> > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > > >
> > > >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > > > Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials
> from:
> > > > http://shop.groupstudy.com
> > > >
> > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > >
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Dec 12 2003 - 12:29:12 GMT-3