Re: no IP address on the interface

Your exact choice will be dependent on the limitations of each particular
method.
Some methods, for example, will not allow you to ping that IP address.
Other methods will affect other features. So it'll be down to the complete
set of requirements of the particular task, and maybe even requirements of
other tasks as well, as one task can break the other task.
So if you go with Multilink interface, Virtual-Template, BVI, PBR,
subif/SVI, tunnel, etc - its all up to the related impact.

The requirement doesn't even have to be IP address on interface. One of the
classical examples that comes to mind is IPv6 over PPP over FR that is self
pingable. That also requires knowledge of operating properties
and limitations of each particular feature.

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:35 AM, marc edwards <renorider_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Experts:
>
> So lets say that (hypothetically) I get an L3 topology that has interfaces
> with no IP address. If instructions give me no real inclination on how to
> treat, than what is the recommendation on proceading. Bridge groups, ip
> unnumbered, something else. Input is greatly appreciated, as always.
>
> Marc
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Pavel Bykov
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net