From: manoj menon (manojmenon123@yahoo.com)
Date: Thu Nov 10 2005 - 05:40:56 GMT-3
hello Jens,
Shall we call the first way a 'legacy' way of doing and second one is 'advanced' or 'modular' way of doing it !!
So In the exam, i would tempt to use the latter one (unless they specifically ask us to use FR-DE or NOT TO USE MQC)
(I have a comment on the way you applied it to the interface, i shall create a map-class put the service-poliy under the map-class and then put it there (if no restrictions on any of these, again)
comments please.
Regards,
manoj
JP <jenseike@start.no> wrote:
Hi group.
I am trying to sett he fr-de bit
Will this two command do the exact same thing, is there any situations one
way are the right way than the other? :
frame-relay de-list 1 protocol ip list 199
interface s0/0
frame-relay de-group 1 203
frame-relay de-group 1 205
frame-relay de-group 1 206
interface s0/0
frame-relay de-group 1 203
frame-relay de-group 1 205
frame-relay de-group 1 206
and this
class-map match-all fr-de
match access-group 199
!
!
policy-map FR-DE
class fr-de
set fr-de
interface Serial0/0
ip address 172.16.1.5 255.255.255.0
service-policy output FR-DE
encapsulation frame-relay
ip ospf network point-to-multipoint
frame-relay map ip 7.7.12.3 203 broadcast
frame-relay map ip 7.7.12.5 205 broadcast
frame-relay map ip 7.7.12.6 206 broadcast
no frame-relay inverse-arp
frame-relay lmi-type ansi
Jens P
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Dec 01 2005 - 09:12:06 GMT-3