From: Brian Lee (ipgirl@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Jun 02 2005 - 14:07:38 GMT-3
Hi Loi,
The problem with your first config is inverse-arp.
You are using dynamic map but also disable inverse-arp
You can show frame map to see if there's any mapping exist.
You can also re-enable frame inv to see the difference in the show frame map
command.
Brian.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Loi, Choon Ho" <ChoonHo.Loi@getronics.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 11:34 PM
Subject: Frame-relay Problem
> Hi,
> Hope someone can explain this to me....
>
> If I have:
>
> r1(multipoint) ------------ r2(physical interface)
>
> If I configure this, r1 and r2 can ping each other.
>
> r1#sh run | b 6/0
> interface Serial6/0
> no ip address
> encapsulation frame-relay
> no frame-relay inverse-arp
> !
> interface Serial6/0.123 multipoint
> ip address 172.16.123.1 255.255.255.0
> frame-relay map ip 172.16.123.2 102 broadcast
> frame-relay map ip 172.16.123.3 103 broadcast
> no frame-relay inverse-arp
>
>
> r2#sh run | b 1/0
> interface Serial1/0
> ip address 172.16.123.2 255.255.255.0
> encapsulation frame-relay
> serial restart-delay 0
> frame-relay interface-dlci 201
> no frame-relay inverse-arp
>
>
> If I configure like this, I got no problem in connectivity...
>
> r1#sh run | b 6/0
> interface Serial6/0
> no ip address
> encapsulation frame-relay
> no frame-relay inverse-arp
> !
> interface Serial6/0.123 multipoint
> ip address 172.16.123.1 255.255.255.0
> frame-relay map ip 172.16.123.2 102 broadcast
> frame-relay map ip 172.16.123.3 103 broadcast
> no frame-relay inverse-arp
>
>
> r2#sh run | b 1/0
> interface Serial1/0
> ip address 172.16.123.2 255.255.255.0
> encapsulation frame-relay
> serial restart-delay 0
> frame-relay map ip 172.16.123.1 201 broadcast
> no frame-relay inverse-arp
>
>
> What's wrong with the first set?
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jul 06 2005 - 14:43:40 GMT-3