From: Jason Guy \(jguy\) (jguy@cisco.com)
Date: Thu Jul 05 2007 - 12:08:02 ART
Very cool and it actually makes sense. The Virtual-Template/Access is
the interface participating in OSPF. The ip unnumbered is just
indicating the ip address to use for the interface. So it makes sense
to put the interface ospf command on the interface with the link running
OSPF.
The loopback on the other hand is an innocent bystander in the
situation. It is unaware of another interface using its IP address. By
applying the ospf command to a loopback just creates a stub host on the
router for the loopback.
Like the network statement, the ospf interface command is used to
indicate the interface to run ospf on. By putting it on the loopback,
the loopback runs ospf...not the loopback and any interface that
unnumbered to it. :) The think I find interesting is the network
statement for the loopback address should have worked fine. The
question is does it create the loopback stub host entry AND the p2p
entry? I have to try this as well.
Jason
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> Eric Dobyns
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 10:10 AM
> To: 'Ben'; 'Gary Duncanson'
> Cc: 'Narbik Kocharians'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: PPPoFR
>
> Tried it to see. Neighbor adjacency only comes up when you place it
on
> the
> virtual-template. I was surprised. I set the frame up ptp, I suppose
you
> might get it up with multipoint at the hub and neighbor statements,
but I
> didn't try it to see.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> Ben
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 2:52 AM
> To: Gary Duncanson
> Cc: eric_dobyns@yahoo.com; Narbik Kocharians; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: PPPoFR
>
> I would place it on the loopback, the interface with an IP address.
>
>
> On 7/5/07, Gary Duncanson <gary.duncanson@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I will take a punt and say the the loopback.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Eric Dobyns" <eric_dobyns@yahoo.com>
> > To: "'Narbik Kocharians'" <narbikk@gmail.com>; "'Gary Duncanson'"
> > <gary.duncanson@googlemail.com>
> > Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 10:18 PM
> > Subject: RE: PPPoFR
> >
> >
> > > Here's a question for you:
> > >
> > > If I were going to add the command "ip ospf 1 area 0" to one of
the
> > > interfaces for that frame link, would I add it to the serial
> > subinterface,
> > > the virtual template or the loopback?
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
Behalf
> Of
> > > Narbik Kocharians
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 1:58 PM
> > > To: Gary Duncanson
> > > Cc: Eric Dobyns; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: Re: PPPoFR
> > >
> > > No worries mate
> > >
> > > On 7/4/07, Gary Duncanson <gary.duncanson@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Thanks Narbik, and thanks Eric for the config you posted.
> > >>
> > >> I can see how you would get a reply using the loopback interface.
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >>
> > >> *From:* Narbik Kocharians <narbikk@gmail.com>
> > >> *To:* Gary Duncanson <gary.duncanson@googlemail.com>
> > >> *Cc:* eric_dobyns@yahoo.com ; Scott Morris
<smorris@ipexpert.com> ;
> > >> ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > >> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 04, 2007 8:38 PM
> > >> *Subject:* Re: PPPoFR
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I see your point, but this will also satisfy the requirement.
> > >>
> > >> On 7/4/07, Gary Duncanson <gary.duncanson@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > No Advanced R&S Workbook here, but a similar situation did come
up
> on
> > >> > lab 3
> > >> > in my IPExpert Version 9.0 Workbook by Scott Morris starting on
> page
> > >> > 43!
> > >> >
> > >> > Does the ' you will be pinging another interface' hold up then
if
> you
> > >> > use
> > >> > ipunnumbered?
> > >> >
> > >> > ----- Original Message -----
> > >> > From: "Eric Dobyns" < eric_dobyns@yahoo.com>
> > >> > To: "'Gary Duncanson'" <gary.duncanson@googlemail.com>;
"'Narbik
> > >> > Kocharians'" <narbikk@gmail.com>
> > >> > Cc: <swm@emanon.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com >
> > >> > Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 7:44 PM
> > >> > Subject: RE: PPPoFR
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > > That would be Lab 7 in your CCIE Advanced R&S Workbook, by
Narbik
> > >> > > Kocharians....starting on page 60...
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > -----Original Message-----
> > >> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
> > Behalf
> > >> > Of
> > >> > > Gary
> > >> > > Duncanson
> > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 10:46 AM
> > >> > > To: Narbik Kocharians
> > >> > > Cc: swm@emanon.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > >> > > Subject: Re: PPPoFR
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Hi Narbik,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Now that's interesting, how will that work for PPPoFR? How
does
> > that
> > >> > > satisfy
> > >> > > the need to ping your own IP address in terms of the IP
address
> > >> > assigned
> > >> > > to
> > >> > > your physical or subinterface used for a FR PVC?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Regards
> > >> > > Gary
> > >> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > >> > > From: Narbik Kocharians
> > >> > > To: Gary Duncanson
> > >> > > Cc: Phillip Day ; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 6:11 PM
> > >> > > Subject: Re: PPPoFR
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Use the "ip unnumbered lo0" to assign an IP address, that
way
> you
> > >> > should
> > >> > > be
> > >> > > able to ping your own IP address.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On 7/4/07, Gary Duncanson <gary.duncanson@googlemail.com>
wrote:
> > >> > > Had this one myself recently.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > This insight came from Scott Morris..
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 'If you are doing PPPoFR, you will never be able to ping
your
> > own
> > >> > IP
> > >> > > address.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > (Unless you use unnumbered from another interface, but
> > technically
> > >> > then
> > >> > > you
> > >> > > are pinging that one!)'
> > >> > >
> > >> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > >> > > From: "Phillip Day" < Phillip.Day@telindus.co.uk>
> > >> > > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2007 11:13 AM
> > >> > > Subject: PPPoFR
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > Does anyone know of an obvious way I'm missing to ping
your
> > >> > > local
> > >> >
> > >> > > > interface on a PPPoFR link? And in a lab is it likely
you
> > would
> > >> > need
> > >> > > to
> > >> > > > be able to?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Thanks in advance
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Phill Day
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > This e-mail is private and may be confidential and is
for
> the
> > >> > > intended
> > >> > > > recipient only. If misdirected, please notify us by
> telephone
> > >> > and
> > >> > > confirm
> > >> > > > that it has been deleted from your system and any copies
> > >> > destroyed.
> > >> > > If
> > >> > > > you
> > >> > > > are not the intended recipient you are strictly
prohibited
> > from
> > >> > > using,
> > >> > > > printing, copying, distributing or disseminating this
e-mail
> > or
> > >> > any
> > >> > > > information contained in it. We use reasonable
endeavours
> to
> > >> > virus
> > >> > > scan
> > >> > > > all
> > >> > > > e-mails leaving the Company but no warranty is given
that
> this
> > >> > e-mail
> > >> > > and
> > >> > > > any
> > >> > > > attachments are virus free. You should undertake your
own
> > virus
> > >> > > checking.
> > >> > > > The right to monitor e-mail communications through our
> network
> > >> > > is
> > >> > > reserved
> > >> > > > by
> > >> > > > us.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Aug 18 2007 - 08:17:39 ART