From: Joe Chang (changjoe@earthlink.net)
Date: Fri May 21 2004 - 19:39:54 GMT-3
Would ISIS even support a point-to-multipoint or partial-mesh network,
regardless of what level of circuits you wish to build? A DIS pseudonode can
accurately advertise zero-cost links because it represents a broadcast
network. A DIS cannot advertise zero-cost links accurately on a hub and
spoke net (for example a spoke as DIS would have link costs comprised of up
to two hops.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
To: "Group Study" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 1:10 PM
Subject: ISIS over Frame Relay
> Hi guys,
>
> When configuring the above in a hub and spoke topology and using only the
> physical interfaces, does it matter if the hub becomes the DIS? In all
the
> examples I've seen so far, I've never seen the isis priority command used
to
> force the hub to become the DIS and I don't understand why that is.
>
> Also, are the following config's on the hub router equally valid?
>
>
> Method 1 - Static mapping
> Hub rtr
>
> int s0
> ip addr x.x.x.1/24
> encap fram
> ip router isis
> fram map clns 122 broad
> fram map clns 123 broad
> fram map ip x.x.x.2 122 broad
> fram map ip x.x.x.3 123 broad
>
> *********************
>
> Method 2 - Dynamic Mapping
> Hub rtr
>
> int s0
> ip addr x.x.x.1/24
> encap fram
> ip router isis
> fram interface-dlci 122
> fram interface-dlci 123
>
> It would be great if someone could explain why or why not these config's
> aren't both valid.
>
> Thanks in advance. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated, Tim
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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 : Wed Jun 02 2004 - 11:12:14 GMT-3