From: Ahsan Mohiuddin (ahsan.mohiuddin@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Apr 27 2008 - 16:41:01 ART
Hello Rich,
thanks for taking an interest in my problem. the ip address i am using for
unnumbered tunnel (loopback) is known via ospf area 0 but its known out the
serial, and not the tunnel. For example, if I use R4's loopback for the
unnumbered tunnel (150.1.4.4), R2 knows this address not out the tunnel but
out the serial (FR) interface going to hub R5. That defeats the purpose of
the tunnel. it will become clearer when u lab it up.
thanks once again
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 7:21 PM, Rich Collins <nilsi2002@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I will try to lab it up tomorrow. I think that the interfaces you are
> using for the unnumbered should already be known in the routing table or
> pick a loopback that is known via a routing protocol.
>
> -Rich
>
>
> On 4/26/08, Ahsan Mohiuddin <ahsan.mohiuddin@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > i just came up with one more possibility. We could run eigrp 20 on R2
> > and R4's loopback 0 and unnumbered tunnel interfaces. The eigrp routes (to
> > remote router's loopback) will be preferred over OSPF routes. Thereby, ping
> > to multicast group from R4 will cause the packets to take the tunnel rather
> > than the FR cloud. The question is, is it valid to add a routing domain,
> > which the lab does not ask you to create?
> >
> > I have seen IE's solution guide for this lab but apparently it suggests
> > nothing to overcome this problem. I would be grateful if Brian D. or Brian
> > M. could shed some light.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Ahsan Mohiuddin <
> > ahsan.mohiuddin@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello again,
> > >
> > > I formed a tunnel between spokes and it works fine when i put ip
> > > addressing over the tunnel. THat is, I am able to ping mcast addr
> > > 228.22.22.22 from R4. R2 sees this as a source for this group out the
> > > tunnel interface.
> > >
> > > However, once i use unnumbered on the tunnel, R4 cannot send ping
> > > packets out the tunnel interface. So, well we are back to square 1; R4 sends
> > > packets out to to R5 over FR. Since we are running dense mode, ip pim
> > > nbma-mode is useless and R5 will not forward out the same interface on which
> > > it received the packets.
> > >
> > > Any ideas how to make R2 receive ping packets from R4 over the
> > > unnumbered tunnel?
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 2:08 PM, Ahsan Mohiuddin <
> > > ahsan.mohiuddin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > much thanks.. i wonder why unnumbered never crossed my mind!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 1:55 AM, Rich Collins <nilsi2002@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > yes. Probably you are allowed "ip unnumbered addresses for the
> > > > > GRE tunnel". You have to then be careful about active routing protocols
> > > > > which will broadcast/multicast over this tunnel. You might need to declare
> > > > > the tunnel interface as passive.
> > > > >
> > > > > You also most likely will need a static mroute.
> > > > > Watch for any RFP failures.
> > > > >
> > > > > i.e.
> > > > > *Mar 1 00:31:41.631: IP(0): s=192.168.5.5 (Tunnel1) d=
> > > > > 228.22.22.22 id=30, ttl=253, prot=1, len=100(100), not RPF
> > > > > interface
> > > > >
> > > > > -Rich
> > > > >
> > > > > On 4/25/08, Ahsan Mohiuddin <ahsan.mohiuddin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > like GRE tunnel? I don't know bcuz the lab instructions
> > > > > > specifically ask NOT to add any IP Addressing thats not there in the diagram
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 8:53 PM, Rich Collins <
> > > > > > nilsi2002@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > nbma mode on the hub will not help you with dense-mode since
> > > > > > > you don't have an explicit join.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Maybe one option is to build a pim dense tunnel between the
> > > > > > > two spokes?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Rich
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 4/25/08, Ahsan Mohiuddin <ahsan.mohiuddin@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hello Group,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I have two FR spokes R2 and R4 connected out R5 (hub)'s
> > > > > > > > multipoint sub-if
> > > > > > > > s1/0.245. The network is running PIM sparse-dense. R2 is a
> > > > > > > > client for group
> > > > > > > > 228.22.22.22. There is no RP for it, hence its a dense-mode
> > > > > > > > group. All PIM
> > > > > > > > routers receive ping replies from the 228.22.22.22 client
> > > > > > > > (R2), except the
> > > > > > > > other FR spoke R4. I have already checked for RPF failure
> > > > > > > > but can't see any.
> > > > > > > > On R5, I can see interface s1/0.245 as being in the (S,G)
> > > > > > > > entry's Incoming
> > > > > > > > interface list but not in the Outgoing list. I have already
> > > > > > > > added ip pim
> > > > > > > > nbma-mode under this sub-if, but R4 is unable to ping the
> > > > > > > > group. ANy
> > > > > > > > comments are appreciated. P.S. nothing but physical
> > > > > > > > interfaces is allowed on
> > > > > > > > both R4 & R2 (FR spokes).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > thanks in adv for your inputs
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Pass the CCIE in six weeks, Guaranteed!
> > > > > > > > http://www.certscience.com/CCIE
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________________________________
> > > > > > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > > > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Pass the CCIE in six weeks, Guaranteed!
http://www.certscience.com/CCIE
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu May 01 2008 - 08:25:52 ART