From: simon hart (simon@harttel.com)
Date: Thu Oct 13 2005 - 04:47:05 GMT-3
I am not sure why you are all looking into things like LAM & ODR etc to
accomplish what is a relatively simple task.
The original question was the R1 does not run any routing protocol but to
have connectivity to all of R3.
With such a question look for the obvious first. R1 must behave like a
host, such as PC. PC's do not run routing protocols but should be able to
ping everything within it's associated network, it does this without LAM/ODR
etc etc. So how does a PC gain this connectivity, well it has a default
gateway, that is an associated device that will find the path for it (AKA
router).
So we need to make R1 behave like a PC. Simple turn off ip routing
no ip routing
As soon as that command is entered the router will never ever run a routing
protocol.
Okay now how to packets get out of the router, easy:-
ip default-gateway R2's IP address.
This is really the only answer that is being looked for. Looking into
anything else is playing with semantics and rather confusing, and I am sure
does not help with learning
HTH
Simon
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
De Witt, Duane
Sent: 13 October 2005 08:07
To: Javier Tomi
Cc: Cisco certification
Subject: RE: Router with out any routing Protocol
Hi
I think it would be best to do things in steps here. I'm not disputing how
LAM works here, but we need layer 3 connectivity with some sort of routing
running between R1 and R2 before we can even start thinking about LAM. If R1
and R2 are in different subnets we have a straight forward layer 3 problem
which needs to be resolved before adding complex things like LAM on top of
it.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Javier Tomi
Sent: 13 October 2005 08:43 AM
Cc: 'Cisco certification'
Subject: Re: Router with out any routing Protocol
Correct me if I am wrong, but with LAM There is no need of both routers
to be on the same network. R2 will install a host route to the IP
address of R1, and due to proxy-arp configured on R2, it will response
to ARP request from R1 searching his default gateway. Of course, R2 will
need a route to R1 network by some means.... Isn't it?
Victor Cappuccio wrote:
>OK, Thanks in advanced.. Any other comments
>
>
>De Witt, Duane wrote:
>
>
>
>>No, R2 will still be looking for something in it's own subnet as far
>>as I know. I'll lab it up later and check, just busy with IEWB at the
>>moment.
>>
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>*From:* Victor Cappuccio [mailto:cvictor@protokolgroup.com]
>>*Sent:* 13 October 2005 08:28 AM
>>*To:* De Witt, Duane
>>*Cc:* Cisco certification
>>*Subject:* Re: Router with out any routing Protocol
>>
>>
>>
>>Hello Duane, Many Thanks for your replys, maybe I'm saying something
>>stupid here, but R1 haves a 10.0.0.1 /8 as a secondary address..
>>And by adding this I will cover all subnets, right?
>>
>>Thanks again
>>Victor.
>>
>>
>>
>>De Witt, Duane wrote:
>>
>>R1 and R2 aren't in a common subnet, so I'm not sure what you are
>>trying to achieve?
>>
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>*From:* Victor Cappuccio [mailto:cvictor@protokolgroup.com]
>>*Sent:* 13 October 2005 08:19 AM
>>*To:* De Witt, Duane
>>*Cc:* Cisco certification
>>*Subject:* Re: Router with out any routing Protocol
>>
>>
>>
>>I wish to have a CCIE rack to play but for now, I just have a 3640
>>gift from a good Friend... (I know that only with one router would
>>not let me understand anything but it's cool to check weird
>>configurations or command parameters / Do someone from the other side
>>of the world (My time zone is GMT -4) have a rack that does not uses
>>in the night and be so generous to share it? :-) )
>>
>>R1:
>>interface FastEthernet0/0
>> ip address 10.0.0.1 255.0.0.0 secondary
>>! Thats why I told about to create a secondary address - I did not
>>finish the idea when I sent the email / I Think I'm getting Crazy with
>>all this stuffs.. Sorry for that
>> ip address 10.50.50.2 255.255.255.248
>> speed 100
>> full-duplex
>>
>>R2:
>>interface FastEthernet4/0
>> ip address 10.60.60.1 255.255.255.248
>> ip mobile arp access-group 2
>> duplex full
>>
>>
>>access-list 2 permit 10.50.50.2
>>
>>De Witt, Duane wrote:
>>
>>I don't think this scenario would work. LAM would require R1 and R2
>>
>>ethernet to be in the same subnet, however it will allow users on R1
>>
>>ethernet to be on a subnet allocate somewhere else in the network.
>>
>>
>>
>>If R1 and R2 ethernet are in different subnets how will you get
>>
>>communication going between the two?
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>
>>From: nobody@groupstudy.com <mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com>
[mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>>
>>Victor Cappuccio
>>
>>Sent: 13 October 2005 07:50 AM
>>
>>Cc: Cisco certification
>>
>>Subject: Re: Router with out any routing Protocol
>>
>>
>>
>>Ok this one was easy, lets change the Scenario a little bit, using the
>>
>>same same topology, but now R1 is in a different Subnet than R2, so now
>>
>>we need to configure LAM on R2, and Redistributing the mobile into the
>>
>>ospf gives R3 the way to get to R1, but what about the return traffic R1
>>
>>
>>
>>-> R3?
>>
>>
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>Victor.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>manoj menon wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>On R1#
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>no ip routing
>>>
>>>!
>>>
>>>ip default-gateway <R2-E0-IP_ADD>
>>>
>>>!
>>>
>>>Either you can advertise the R1-R2 Ethernet subnet in OSPF, or
>>>
>>>redistribute, or static route back to R1, and redistribute static into
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>OSPF...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Comments...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Mnaoj
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>*/Victor Cappuccio <cvictor@protokolgroup.com>
<mailto:cvictor@protokolgroup.com>/* wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello People, consider this Scenario
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 10.1.1.0/24
>>>
>>> R1 --- Ethernet --- R2 | Network Cloud Running OSPF | R3.
>>>
>>> ---Vlan 50 ----
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You are not allowed to configure any routing protocol on R1, but
>>>
>>> one of
>>>
>>> the requirements is that R1 should be able to ping any ip address
>>>
>>> in R3,
>>>
>>> how would you accomplish this? I thought to create a secondary
>>>
>>> address
>>>
>>> in R1 with an IP Classful Address Mask (10.0.0.1/8) and complete
>>>
>>> the ARP
>>>
>>> Table for R3 physical interfaces with R2 Ethernet Mac Address
>>>
>>> (since R2
>>>
>>> knows the complete network).- I Think this could work Ok / Have
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>not
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> tested yet .. Can you see another was of accomplishing this task?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Victor.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>_______________________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>>
>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>><http://pa.yahoo.com/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=36035/*http://music.yah
<http://pa.yahoo.com/*http:/us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=36035/*http:/music.yahoo.com
/unlimited/>
>>
>>_oo.com/unlimited/>
<http://pa.yahoo.com/*http:/us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=36035/*http:/music.yahoo.com
/unlimited/>_
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________________________________
>>
>>Subscription information may be found at:
>>
>>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Nov 06 2005 - 22:00:50 GMT-3