From: Arun Arumuganainar (aarumuga@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Oct 13 2005 - 05:06:43 GMT-3
Does R1 has any loop back address assigned to it !!!
If so Does any to any connectivity requirement mandated ping from R2 and R3
to R1's loop back ???
If answer to other two question is Yes . Default gateway solution will not
work !!!!
Thanks and Regards
Arun
----- Original Message -----
From: "simon hart" <simon@harttel.com>
To: "De Witt, Duane" <duane.dewitt@siemens.com>; "Javier Tomi" <fjtm@tid.es>
Cc: "Cisco certification" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 1:17 PM
Subject: RE: Router with out any routing Protocol
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.14/129 - Release Date:
11/10/2005
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.14/129 - Release Date:
11/10/2005
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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