From: simon hart (simon@harttel.com)
Date: Thu Oct 13 2005 - 07:29:37 GMT-3
Hi Danny,
Your findings are both correct and perhaps misleading.
If you turn off ip routing but do no set any default-gateway then packets
will not leave R1 irrespective of ODR. Now if you set a default-gateway on
R1 that points to R2 ethernet interface you will see that you have
connectivity.
In addition, if you look at R2 and have enabled ODR, perform the following:
sh ip route odr
You will see the subnets associated with R1.
So this is the learning. With ip routing turned off, R1 will not install
the default advertised by R2 as there is no routing table, to overcome this
one has to configure the default-gateway on R1
HTH
Simon
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Danny Muizebelt
Sent: 13 October 2005 11:15
To: De Witt, Duane; simon hart; Arun Arumuganainar; Javier Tomi
Cc: Cisco certification
Subject: AW: Router with out any routing Protocol
I hate to digress but my lab tells me that "ip routing" must be enabled on
the spoke routers when using ODR.
My comments are prefixed with: >>>>>>
R1(spoke) 10.2.3.1/24 ---- 10.2.3.5/24 R5(hub) Lo0:10.100.100.5
R1(config)#no ip routing
>>>>>> Switched off routing
R1(config)#exit
R1#debug cdp packets
CDP packet info debugging is on
R1#debug cdp ip
CDP IP info debugging is on
R1#
Oct 13 11:59:14: CDP-IP: Writing prefix 10.100.100.1/32
Oct 13 11:59:14: CDP-PA: version 2 packet sent out on Serial0
>>>>>> ODR works, sends its own loopback network
Oct 13 11:59:19: CDP-PA: Packet received from R5 on interface Serial0
Oct 13 11:59:19: **Entry found in cache**
Oct 13 11:59:19: CDP-IP: Reading default route 10.2.3.5 via Serial0
Oct 13 11:59:19: CDP-IP: Updating default route 10.2.3.5 in routing table
>>>>>> Receives default route and installs it
R1#sh ip route
Default gateway is not set
Host Gateway Last Use Total Uses Interface
ICMP redirect cache is empty
>>>>>> Here we see no evidence of a default route!!!
R1#ping 10.100.100.5
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.100.100.5, timeout is 2 seconds:
.....
Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)
>>>>>> Nope, doesn't work either...
R1#conf t
Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z.
R1(config)#ip routing
>>>>>> switched on routing
Oct 13 12:00:14: CDP-IP: Writing prefix 10.100.100.1/32
Oct 13 12:00:14: CDP-PA: version 2 packet sent out on Serial0exit
Oct 13 12:00:19: CDP-PA: Packet received from R5 on interface Serial0
Oct 13 12:00:19: **Entry found in cache**
Oct 13 12:00:19: CDP-IP: Reading default route 10.2.3.5 via Serial0
Oct 13 12:00:19: CDP-IP: Updating default route 10.2.3.5 in routing table
>>>>>> Again we got the default route to R5
R1#sh ip route
Codes: C - connected, S - static, I - IGRP, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP
D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area
N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2
E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2, E - EGP
i - IS-IS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2, ia - IS-IS inter
area
* - candidate default, U - per-user static route, o - ODR
P - periodic downloaded static route
Gateway of last resort is 10.2.3.5 to network 0.0.0.0
10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 2 subnets, 2 masks
C 10.2.3.0/24 is directly connected, Serial0
C 10.100.100.1/32 is directly connected, Loopback0
o* 0.0.0.0/0 [160/1] via 10.2.3.5, 00:00:12, Serial0
>>>>>> And a nice ODR default route has been installed
R1#ping 10.100.100.5
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.100.100.5, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 4/5/8 ms
>>>>>> Works!
R1#sh run | i router
R1#
>>>>>> And no routing process configured.
So, does ODR count as a routing protocol because "ip routing" must be
enabled or not?
Cheers,
-Danny
> -----Urspr|ngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] Im Auftrag
> von De Witt, Duane
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 13. Oktober 2005 10:22
> An: simon hart; Arun Arumuganainar; Javier Tomi
> Cc: Cisco certification
> Betreff: RE: Router with out any routing Protocol
>
> Let's clear something up here: if there is a requirement to run a
> router without a routing protocol it means you are required to
> specify "no ip routing" on the device.
>
> If you knew how ODR worked it would be clear that any spoke in ODR
> runs without ip routing while only the hub requires ip routing to be
> enabled. This is clearly documented on the docCD.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: simon hart [mailto:simon@harttel.com]
> Sent: 13 October 2005 10:16 AM
> To: Arun Arumuganainar; De Witt, Duane; Javier Tomi
> Cc: Cisco certification
> Subject: RE: Router with out any routing Protocol
>
> Arun,
>
> But that was not the question. You are putting a lot of what if's
> into the
> equation. If there is a requirement to ping the loopbacks of R1
> from R2 and
> R3, then there will be need to advertise the loopbacks of R1 or the
> creation
> of a default route pointing to R1. If R1 is going to advertise the
> loopbacks then ODR would work, but ODR, although using CDP, can be
> classed
> as a routing protocol, it is the dissemination of routing
> information.
>
> Simon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf
> Of
> Arun Arumuganainar
> Sent: 13 October 2005 09:07
> To: simon hart; De Witt, Duane; Javier Tomi
> Cc: Cisco certification
> Subject: Re: Router with out any routing Protocol
>
>
> 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://mus
> ic.yah
> >
> <http://pa.yahoo.com/*http:/us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=36035/*http:/music.y
> ahoo.com
> > /unlimited/>
> > >>
> > >>_oo.com/unlimited/>
> >
> <http://pa.yahoo.com/*http:/us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=36035/*http:/music.y
> ahoo.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
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> ___
> 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: 267.11.14/131 - Release Date:
> 12/10/2005
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.14/131 - Release Date:
> 12/10/2005
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> ___
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Diese Information ist vertraulich und ausschlie_lich zur Kenntnisnahme durch
den (die) genannten Adressaten bestimmt.
Wenn Sie nicht der vorgesehene Adressat sind, informieren sie uns bitte
unverz|glich.
The information herein is confidential and intended solely for the attention
and use of the named addressee(s).
If you are not the intended recipient please inform us immediately.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Nov 06 2005 - 22:00:50 GMT-3