Scability... You can have only so many PNNI (32?) links without going into
ATM routing areas... If you have singular attached ATM switches Link it
IISP and conserve the PNNI
Lou Nelson, CCNP, CCDA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nigel Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Mike Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: Nortel/Bay ATM woes...
> Hey Mike,
> You were right on! Apparently the call was going out but
> never received. So the local les/bus pair showed the remote les/bus pair
as
> "partially operational" Once we got the addresses right the problem was
> history. There was also mention of a IISP route as well as the PNNI
routes.
> I did some reading and found that the IISP routes are more like UNI routes
> and do no dynamic routing, whereas you PNNI routes do. My question is why
> in the topology would one place a IISP route and not let PNNI do it all
> dynamically?
>
> Please let me know if I'm totally lost.... I'm doing allot of reading on
> the subject at the moment..trying to get a few things cleared up in my
> head(web closet)
>
> TIA
>
> Nigel
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mike Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2000 3:03 PM
> Subject: Re: Nortel/Bay ATM woes...
>
>
> > Nigel,
> >
> > We have Nortel's ATM solution in our LAN. The "partially operational"
> result is usually caused by one of two things or both.
> >
> > 1. Your call routes (on one side) are not set correctly.
> > 2. There is an error (on one side) in the remote les/bus address.
> >
> > Specifically, the error means that traffic is being transmitted or
> received by the remote device, but the local device can't "see" the far
end.
> >
> > When I configure these switches, I open notepad and then cut and paste
the
> LES/BUS addresses into SpeedView. That's the only way I've found to not
> screw up the address.
> >
> > ..confused yet?
> >
> > Mike Smith
> >
> > >From: "Nigel Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >Reply-To: "Nigel Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >To: "Bryant Andrews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Cisco Group
> Study" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >Subject: Nortel/Bay ATM woes...
> > >Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2000 01:54:12 +0100
> > >
> > >Hi All,
> > > I was wondering if anyone in the group had any ATM
experience
> using Bay 5000 and Centillion 1600 ATM switches.
> > >I'm trying to solve a problem with the LES/BUS and remote coop pairs
> within the ELANs. When running a "show les"
> > >that various ELANs show LES/BUS as partially and fully Optimal. In
order
> to get a greater understanding of the whole picture I'm now trying to
figure
> out what exactly does Fully/Partially Optimal mean. Currently all devices
> join the various ELANs(12) but within those twelve ELANs various LES/BUS
> pairs show up as fully and partially optimal.
> > >
> > >Does anyone have an idea as to what I'm rambling about?
> > >
> > >TIA
> > >
> > >Nigel
> >
> >
>
> ___________________________________
> UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
