From: Victor Cappuccio (cvictor@protokolgroup.com)
Date: Sat Jun 17 2006 - 14:06:13 ART
Hi Guys
Please any one could comment about the configuration done in the Solution
guide is appreciated for that task in particular
1.- I think that a frame-relay map ip 5.1.0.2 501 b at R5 and frame-relay
map ip 5.1.0.4 105 b at R1 is needed.
2.- , IHMO the no frame-relay inverse-arp for ip dlci 104 in R1 is not
needed cause the dlci is assigned to the main interface at R4 with no ip
add. _COULD the ARP reply from R4 generate a problem here? . The same
Question but for the configuration done at router 5,
I recently posted a question about what I thought it was a BUG, and I did
not get why this was a Feature, but I think that I understand now the Logic
behind of having the same IP Address in WAN interfaces, could help in some
situations :D Thanks for that Brian Dennis..-
Hard to learn new stuff, but one step at the time makes it more fun
Rack1R4#show run int s0/0
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 131 bytes
!
interface Serial0/0
ip address 5.1.0.4 255.255.255.0
encapsulation frame-relay
no fair-queue
frame-relay lmi-type cisco
end
Rack1R4#show run int s0/0.1
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 113 bytes
!
interface Serial0/0.1 point-to-point
ip address 5.1.0.4 255.255.255.0
frame-relay interface-dlci 405
end
Like in this case, for this particular topology we have the Dynamic Entre.
so the no frame-relay inverse-arp ip 104 is not needed at all right?
Rack1R1#show frame-relay map
Serial0/0 (up): ip 5.1.0.2 dlci 102(0x66,0x1860), dynamic,
broadcast,, status defined, active
Serial0/0 (up): ip 5.1.0.4 dlci 104(0x68,0x1880), dynamic, <-- This
helped a lot to understand the logic of the same ip add on multiples
interfaces :D
broadcast,, status defined, active
Serial0/0 (up): ip 5.1.0.5 dlci 105(0x69,0x1890), dynamic,
broadcast,, status defined, active
Thanks
Victor.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 01 2006 - 07:57:33 ART