From: Arun Arumuganainar (aarumuga@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Oct 13 2005 - 09:42:18 GMT-3
Let us make some thing clear here !!!Could any one sent the exact wording in
the question !!!
I wanted to clarify the following !!!
Are we required to disable "ip routing " on R1 ????
Or
Are we required not to advertise any of the R1 address via routing protocol
????
I would assume Yes to second question and then make my configuration . In
such a case this is a clear possibility .
Step 1 : On R1 Create ip default route to point R2's Ethernet interface
This can be done using "IP Default Network " cli.
Step 2: Configure NAT Overload on R1 so that All the packet originated on
R1 gets nated to R1's Ethernet facing R2
Ok...But this breaks a general rule : No default networks to be configured
unless specified . Hence if we are not given any room for default networks
!!! Then we will have to fallback on PBR ( Local Policy Routing ) as
substitute for Step 1 .
Pls. Note: In my opinion ODR also falls under routing protocol category !!!
If R1 is going to advertise its connected address over ODR then it also
amounts violation of question constraints .
I have also seen PBR is resorted to when there is no routing information is
available on the routers in Cisco Press Books CCIE Practice Lab ( Lab 4 )
and also in CheckIT labs !!!
Hence this solution should be in line with CCIE way of doing thing ( Pls.
correct me ..if anybody else have differing opinion ).
Thanks and Regards
Arun
----- Original Message -----
From: "simon hart" <simon@harttel.com>
To: "Arun Arumuganainar" <aarumuga@hotmail.com>; "De Witt, Duane"
<duane.dewitt@siemens.com>; "Javier Tomi" <fjtm@tid.es>
Cc: "Cisco certification" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 1:45 PM
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://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
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Nov 06 2005 - 22:00:50 GMT-3