From: ccie2be (ccie2be@nyc.rr.com)
Date: Tue Apr 12 2005 - 12:13:49 GMT-3
I'm not sure I completely understand your question, but if I do, it seems to
me that multilink is independent of how the f/r switches behave.
The way I think of it, multilink is to serial interfaces what etherchannel
is to ethernet links - it's just a way to aggregate links. I don't think or
see any reason for the behavior of the f/r switches to do anything
differently just because you decided to aggregate multiple links running f/r
encap.
Of course, the routers on each side have to know what's going on so they can
re-assemble fragmented packets if any, but you're use of multilink should be
transparent to the carrier, I think.
Maybe someone knows differently.
Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Sean
C
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 9:01 AM
To: Group Study
Subject: OT: Realworld use of Multilink Frame Relay
Hello,
When implementing Multilink Frame Relay (FRF.16) - I'm trying to understand
how the carrier advertises PVCs. My question is this: does the carrier
advertise all PVCs on each T1?
IOW - if an original implementation of FR had 2 T1s with the 1st T1
utilizing
PVCs # 1, 2 & 3 and the 2nd T1 utilizing PVCs # 4, 5 & 6. If wishing to
utilize Multilink FR, does the carrier now need to advertise all PVCs on
both
T1s? IOW - will the 1st T1 now carry PVCs # 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 and the 2nd
T1
will carry the same PVCs #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6? It's the only way I can see
this happening because I can't figure out if the 2nd T1 fails, how the 1st
T1
will be able to support PVCs 4, 5 & 6.
I appreciate any answer supplied. I hope my question is stated simply
enough.
I had searched on CCO:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122newft/122
t
/122t8/ft_mfr.htm
and Googled some but have not found the appropriate answer.
Thanks in advance,
Sean
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue May 03 2005 - 07:54:56 GMT-3