From: mani poopal (mani_ccie@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Oct 01 2004 - 22:17:55 GMT-3
Hi Tim,
I think when you want to filter in the border peers, even though you have promiscous keyword, you have to use peer-on-demand defaults and not prom-peer defauls. I think if you read practical studies volume 1 you can get more information.
Mani
ccie2be <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
Hi guys,
This scenario is an example from the Doc CD at this link:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fibm_
c/bcfpart2/bcfdlsw.htm#wp1004587
DLSWRTR1
dlsw local-peer peer-id 10.2.17.1 group 1 promiscuous
dlsw rsvp default
dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 10.3.15.2
dlsw peer-on-demand-defaults rsvp 40 10
IPRTR1
dlsw local-peer peer-id 10.3.15.2 group 1 border promiscuous
dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 10.3.16.2
IPRTR2
dlsw local-peer peer-id 10.3.16.2 group 2 border promiscuous
dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 10.3.15.2
DLSWRTR2
dlsw local-peer peer-id 10.14.25.2 group 2 promiscuous
dlsw rsvp default
dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 10.3.16.2In this example, dlsw rtr 1 is both
"promiscuous" and an "on demand peer"Notice that even though dlsw rtr1 is
configured with the "promiscuous" keywordit is only configured with "dlsw
peer-on-demand-defaults" command- not the "dlsw prom-peer-default" command.
Why is that?Shouldn't dlsw rtr 1 also be configured with the "dlsw
prom-peer-default" command?Now, suppose dlsw rtr 1 was configured with the
"prom-peer-default" butnot the "peer-on-demand-default", would everything
still work fine or would I lose points on the lab?Also, notice that dlsw rtr 1
is configured with the command,"dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 10.3.15.2" which points
to the border router for group 1, IPRTR1.I think that this command could have
been left off dlsw rtr 1 as long as IPRTR1 was configured with a remote-peer
command pointing to dlsw rtr 1. Is this true?TIA, Tim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 06 2004 - 17:11:42 GMT-3