From: Felix Nkansah (felixnkansah@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Oct 09 2007 - 13:58:09 ART
Hi Grace,
As a matter of fact, the lab COULD "expect you to configure something as a
matter of course and wouldn't specifically state something."
It would be implied, and you would need to infer from the wording. For
instance, they could say "assume router R4 is a non-Cisco device." In that
case, you would have to use the IETF encapsulation for the PVC between this
device and any other router.
As a result, the frame relay 'encapsulation' or the 'frame map'
commands should specify IETF encapsulation for that PVC on both router
pairs.
Regards,
Felix
On 10/9/07, Grace Simon <SimonG@pcsystems.gr> wrote:
>
> Thanks for that Felix, clear and precise.
>
>
>
> I'm cool with doing what the lab tells you, I'm just making sure they
> wouldn't expect you to configure something as a matter of course and
> wouldn't specifically state something.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Simon
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Felix Nkansah [mailto:felixnkansah@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 09, 2007 7:05 PM
> *To:* Grace Simon
> *Subject:* Re: Frame Relay Encapsulation and LMI types
>
>
>
> Hi Grace,
>
>
>
> There's a difference between the frame relay LMI type and the frame relay
> encapsulation.
>
>
>
> There are 3 different LMI types, and you need to configure your router to
> match whatever is being used by the frame relay switch. However, routers
> usually 'autosense' for the LMI type and as such the engineer doesnt need to
> manually enter it.
>
>
>
> However, if the lab requirements dictates that you use a particular type,
> you must enter it on the router interface regardless of whether it
> automatically senses it or not.
>
>
>
> Concerning the frame relay encapsulation, it is usually cisco or ietf. The
> 'cisco' encapsulation is proprietary and supported by cisco routers only.
> It's your lab that would dictate or imply whether you use the default
> 'cisco' encapsulation or the 'ietf' method.
>
>
>
> In short, LMI is a Router-to-FrameSwitch affair, whereas the encapsulation
> is Router-to-Router affair. Watch what your lab tells you!
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Felix
>
>
>
> On 10/9/07, *Grace Simon* <SimonG@pcsystems.gr> wrote:
>
> Hi Guys,
>
>
>
> Does anyone know why in the internetworkexpert labs some of the
> frame-relay routers have the following commands:
>
>
>
> frame-relay lmi-type cisco
>
> encapsulation frame-relay IETF
>
>
>
> I've never seen frame relay in the real world and only played with it in
> the labs so my knowledge is a little limited.
>
> I've re-configured the device in question with just the following
>
>
>
> encapsulation frame-relay
>
>
>
> and completely done away with the frame-relay lmi-type and everything is
> working hunky dory.
>
>
>
> Just making sure this isn't something I need to consider in the real lab
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> Simon.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Nov 16 2007 - 13:11:12 ART