From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Tue Apr 27 2004 - 12:41:41 GMT-3
I would say that 90-95% of the time you'll have TCP. That's the most common
implementation it seems. Promiscuous should work with FST as well, since
it's an IP-based scheme not tied directly to any interface (untested, just
my warped logic).
But when in doubt, ask the proctor!
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, CISSP,
JNCIS, et al.
IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
http://www.ipexpert.net <http://www.ipexpert.net/>
_____
From: Tim Last [mailto:packtmon@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 11:31 AM
To: Scott Morris; 'David Hurtado'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: DLSw Lite in promiscous mode
Hey Scott and David,
Great scenario !!! and question.
But, what about other types of encaps in combo with promiscuous?
Based on what you said below, it's clear that neither Direct nor Dlsw Lite
will work with promiscusous mode.
But, how about Fst? Is that encap also out?
From the lab point of view, that would be nice since we could then say, if
promiscuous mode is used, you must use TCP encap.
Thanks, Tim
Scott Morris <swm@emanon.com> wrote:
DLSW TCP is more open-ended in terms of the source/destination idea, and
hence 'promiscuous' was born. With Lite or Direct encapsulations, it is
tied much closer to the interface itself and logically it would seem pretty
important to indicate that sort of thing going in.
With your dlsw local-peer statement, the only address recognized is an IP,
which would fit very nicely in the TCP mentality of encapsulation. If there
was a version of the local-peer that said peer-id serial0/0, then that may
be different.
Logically, I don't think that the router would have the proper association
of encapsulation type. That's just my warped thinking though. :) Did you
try any of the debug commands on your promiscuous router? You may find the
answer in there as to why it's not working.
Other than that, simply based on experience and things I've heard over the
years, your findings are right up there with what I've seen. Sorry I don't
have an answer beyond what you already know, which is simply that it will
not work.
HTH,
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, CISSP,
JNCIS, et al.
IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
http://www.ipexpert.net
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
David Hurtado
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 8:18 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: DLSw Lite in promiscous mode
Hello everybody,
Can DLSw Lite works in promiscous mode? I couldn't make it work. I had the
following topology:
|----------S0/0 (R2)
|
(R3) s0/0
|
|---------S0/0 (R1)
All the routers connect to each other thru Frame-Relay. I have to configure
DLSw peering between R3 & R2 and between R3 & R1. I decide to use DLSw Lite
encapsulation. This are the configurations for R1 and R2:
R1
dlsw local-peer peer-id 150.1.1.1
dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface Serial0/0 16
dlsw bridge-group 11
interface Serial0/0
ip address 149.1.123.1 255.255.255.0
frame-relay map llc2 16 broadcast
R2
dlsw local-peer peer-id 150.1.2.2
dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface Serial0/0 16
interface Serial0/0
ip address 149.1.123.2 255.255.255.0
frame-relay map llc2 16 broadcast
If I configure DLSw in R3 without promicous mode everything works great:
R3
dlsw local-peer peer-id 150.1.3.3 promiscuous
dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface Serial0/0 17 cost 5
dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface Serial0/0 18 cost 1
dlsw bridge-group 11
interface Serial0/0
ip address 149.1.123.3 255.255.255.0
frame-relay map llc2 17 broadcast
frame-relay map llc2 18 broadcast
frame-relay map ip 149.1.123.1 18 broadcast
frame-relay map ip 149.1.123.2 17 broadcast
R3 connects with R1 and R2:
Rack1R3#sh dlsw peer
Peers: state pkts_rx pkts_tx type drops ckts TCP
uptime
LLC2 Se0/0 17 CONNECT 6838 14 conf 0 0 -
00:05:17
LLC2 Se0/0 18 CONNECT 6837 13 conf 0 0 -
00:05:15
Total number of connected peers: 2
Total number of connections: 2
But if I change the configuration in R3 making it work in promiscous mode:
dlsw local-peer peer-id 150.1.3.3 promiscuous
dlsw bridge-group 11
interface Serial0/0
ip address 149.1.123.3 255.255.255.0
frame-relay map llc2 17 broadcast
frame-relay map llc2 18 broadcast
frame-relay map ip 149.1.123.1 18 broadcast
frame-relay map ip 149.1.123.2 17 broadcast
It doesn't work at all:
Rack1R3#sh dlsw peers
Peers: state pkts_rx pkts_tx type drops ckts TCP
uptime
Total number of connected peers: 0
Total number of connections: 0
Rack1R2#sh dlsw peers
Peers: state pkts_rx pkts_tx type drops ckts TCP
uptime
LLC2 Se0/0 16 DISCONN 0 0 conf 0 0 -
-
Total number of connected peers: 0
Total number of connections: 0
Rack1R1#sh dlsw peers
Peers: state pkts_rx pkts_tx type drops ckts TCP
uptime
LLC2 Se0/0 16 DISCONN 0 0 conf 0 0 -
-
Total number of connected peers: 0
Total number of connections: 0
Could somebody tell me if i'm doing something wrong? If you need more debug
or show outputs just ask for it.
Thanks a lot
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon May 03 2004 - 19:48:56 GMT-3