Re: OT: Logical Bundle

Hi guys,

I would have thought that if you're stuck with POS links, you could look at
using BCP rather than IPCP and then it's a layer 2 problem that can be
sorted using VRRP (and/or HSRP).

E.g. VRRP group 1 for the Cisco end and VRRP group 2 for the brand H
boxes...

Cheers,
Adam

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Tony Singh <mothafungla_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Just remembered that you said POS, see of you can change the STM1's for 1G
> Ethernet DWDM waves probably cheaper and more bandwidth anyways.... else
> you'll have to use converters for Ethernet which is prob not best design
> practice and over complicates things
>
> --
> BR
>
> Tony
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 16 May 2013, at 22:39, Mohammad Moghaddas <moghaddas.it_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm sure that you are right Marc and Tony, but unfortunately that's what
> I've been asked to fire a quick solution of nowhere, which seems
> impossible.
> > The customer has some crazy policies. They have their own reasons of
> using
> this topology without anything in between.
> > Do you think that it would be possible using VLANs?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mohammad
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 2:08 AM, Tony Singh <mothafungla_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Marc
> >
> > It's who are we ;)
> >
> >
> > --
> > BR
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone on 3
> >
> > On 16 May 2013, at 22:21, marc abel <marcabel_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I think to make this work you would need a layer 2 switch in between.
> Additionally the routers would need to support etherchannel. I think the
> 7613
> will, but only if you have the switching module. I have no idea about the
> Huawei as I wouldn't let one of those within 10 miles of my network.
> >>
> >> I guess my question is why? Why not put a routing protocol between them
> and
> let them route? You need a few more IP addresses but you could even use
> /31's
> between each link.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Mohammad Moghaddas
> <moghaddas.it_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Imagine that there is no configuration, as it does not matter. Because
> the
> >> restriction is only on the physical topology.
> >> Assume that we are going to configure the following static route on both
> of
> >> Cisco routers:
> >> ip route 10.10.1.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.1
> >> And 192.168.1.1 is a logical IP which is on both of Huawei devices.
> >> and the same for reverse of the scenario.
> >> I've tried VRRP, but I failed to success. It seems to me that all the
> links
> >> should be placed on the same subnet.... but how?
> >> Would you please guide me through it?
> >> I mean for example how should H1 reach the virtual address of Cisco
> routers
> >> if its link to C1 is not available?
> >> C1---x----H1-------
> >> | | |
> >> | | 10.10.1.0
> >> | | |
> >> C2--------H2--------
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 7:57 PM, Paul Cocker
> <groupstudy_at_paulcocker.net>wrote:
> >>
> >> > VRRP....
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 16 May 2013 15:11, Mohammad Moghaddas <moghaddas.it_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Let me clarify more about the issue.
> >> >> For example, C1 or C2 could ping 200.200.200.200 and H1 or H2 should
> >> >> respond the icmp message, and whenever one of them is unavailable,
> the
> >> >> other one should handle the response.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Tony Singh <mothafungla_at_gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > POS is point to point, how do the routers know of each others
> subnets?
> >> >> > Dynamic routing or they sharing a /30 Cisco-Huawei
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > BR
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Sent from my iPhone on 3
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On 16 May 2013, at 14:19, Mohammad Moghaddas <
> moghaddas.it_at_gmail.com>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Yes, VRRP is supported.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Tony Singh <mothafungla_at_gmail.com
> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> does Huawei support VRRP? They prob do HSRP :p
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> BR
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Tony
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone on 3
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On 16 May 2013, at 13:07, Mohammad Moghaddas
> <moghaddas.it_at_gmail.com>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Hi.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Sorry for the OT.
> >> >> >> > I was not sure of what to use as the subject of this OT.
> >> >> >> > There are 2 * 7613 and 2 Huawei routers connected as below:
> >> >> >> > C1--------H1
> >> >> >> > | |
> >> >> >> > | |
> >> >> >> > C2--------H2
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > All the connected ports are POS (STM1).
> >> >> >> > We need that Huawei routers see Cisco routers as using 1 IP
> address,
> >> >> >> Cisco
> >> >> >> > routers see Huawei routers using 1 IP address.
> >> >> >> > We can't add any link and make the topology a full-mesh one.
> >> >> >> > I have thoughts of some L2 solutions using VLANs, but I would
> >> >> >> appreciate to
> >> >> >> > hear any solutions from you guys.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Thanks.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> >> >> > Subscription information may be found at:
> >> >> >> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >> >>
> >> >>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> >> Subscription information may be found at:
> >> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>
> >>
> >> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> Subscription information may be found at:
> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Marc Abel
> >> CCIE #35470
> >> (Routing and Switching)
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Fri May 17 2013 - 09:47:45 ART