From: Ashok Ananda \(aananda\) (aananda@cisco.com)
Date: Wed Aug 31 2005 - 03:25:32 GMT-3
dialer string is NOT required at the answering end if authentication
(PAP, CHAP) is configured. If authentication not configured, we should
have dialer string at answering end and can have dialer list with 'deny
ip'.
Thanks & Regards,
Ashok M A
-----Original Message-----
From: Schulz, Dave [mailto:DSchulz@dpsciences.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 8:54 PM
To: Arun Arumuganainar; Ashok Ananda (aananda); Stephen Hull ;
nobody@groupstudy.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: ISDN one way dialing semantics
Correct! But do you need the dialer string at the answering end (if
they are never going to dial the other side).
Dave Schulz, CCDP, CCNP, CCSP
Project Manager / TAC Supervisor
Data Processing Sciences Corporation
10810 Kenwood Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45242
Phone - (513) 791-7100 ext.7411
Fax - (513) 791-4676
Email: dschulz@dpsciences.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Arun Arumuganainar [mailto:aarumuga@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 10:53 AM
To: Ashok Ananda (aananda); Schulz, Dave; Stephen Hull ;
nobody@groupstudy.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: ISDN one way dialing semantics
If authentication is enabled . You need A) Dialer string B) Remote host
name and C) User name and Password at the global command .
Thanks and Regards
Arun
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ashok Ananda (aananda)" <aananda@cisco.com>
To: "Schulz, Dave" <DSchulz@dpsciences.com>; "Stephen Hull "
<shull@getsouthern.com>; <nobody@groupstudy.com>;
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 8:10 PM
Subject: RE: ISDN one way dialing semantics
> Just found that dialer string is required if no authentication is
> configured. If authentication is configured remote end pings even
> without dialer string configured at the remote end.
>
>
>
> Thanks & Regards,
>
> Ashok M A
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> Schulz, Dave
> Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 4:25 PM
> To: Stephen Hull ; nobody@groupstudy.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: ISDN one way dialing semantics
>
> Steve -
>
> Do you need to have the dialer string at the answering side for L3 to
L2
> if you never initiate a call from this location? I agree that you do
> need the interesting traffic definitions.
>
> Dave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Sent: 8/28/2005 6:23 PM
> Subject: RE: ISDN one way dialing semantics
>
> Thanks,
>
> I can't believe that I forgot that. That was too basic.
>
> Thanks for the help,
>
> Stephen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ccie2be [mailto:ccie2be@nyc.rr.com]
> Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2005 4:33 PM
> To: Stephen Hull; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: ISDN one way dialing semantics
>
> Stephen,
>
> If R1 is allowed to call R2, you need to remember that R2 must have a
> way to do L3 to L2 address resolution for return traffic to get back
to
> R1.
>
> If you remove the telephone # of R1 from the dialer map of R2, how
will
> R2
> know how to resolve return traffic from R1?
>
> On the other hand, if R2 doesn't have any defined "interesting"
traffic
> (no dialer-group # command), R2 can never call R1.
>
> HTH, Tim
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> Stephen Hull
> Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2005 5:00 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: ISDN one way dialing semantics
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance for any help.
>
>
>
> I have a question about semantics concerning ISDN. If you get
something
> that says only one router will dial the other, what are they actually
> asking for? I am not referring to anything in particular, just a
> generic question. I am doing a workbook that is asking for something
> like this. What I mean by this is there are several ways to look at
the
> question. Would they want one of the routers to never try and make a
> call or would it mean that only one router could establish a
connection.
>
>
>
>
> The 2 ways I am thinking of are of course, on one of the routers, to
> remove the dialer map. The other way I was thinking of was to give
the
> non-calling router a bogus dial number in the dialer map. Either way,
> the end result is that, lets say Router2, will never be able to
> establish a call to Router5. If Router5, however, is configured
> properly, it will call Router2. I know ultimately you Ask the
Proctor,
> but I am trying to prepare completely for any possible circumstances.
>
>
>
> Would either way be acceptable? Are the proctors looking for the end
> result or specific commands that you should or shouldn't have in your
> config?
>
>
>
> Anyway, any help is greatly appreciated.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -Stephen
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Sep 04 2005 - 17:01:20 GMT-3