Thanks for the research, Jim. Jim has shown that when a router attempts to
insert into a ring (MAU) with a different ring number than an
already-inserted router, it doesn't work. The second router fails to insert
into the ring. Here's what happens, assuming you don't use Rodgers Moore's
creative Rube Goldberg approach. &;-)
The Sniffer trace show this:
The two routers inserted fine at first. (Jim must not have made the ring
number change yet.)
Around frame 792 we see some ring disruption, including some Claim Token
frames. The Sniffer becomes the active monitor, which can happen. The ring
disruption was caused by Cisco99B leaving the ring, presumably because Jim
was starting the reconfiguration.
In frame 801, Cisco99B comes back and does its duplicate address tests.
Cisco99B gets no responses to these, which is normal. It has a MAC unique
address.
In frame 806, Cisco99B sends a Ring Initialization frame to the functional
group address C00000000002 for the Ring Parameter Server.
In frame 808, Cisco927 responds to Cisco99B and includes the information
that the Local Ring Number is 000A. (10 in decimal.)
Cisco99B goes away then until frame 841 when it makes another feeble
attempt to get on the ring. Same thing happens. Cisco927 tells Cisco99B
that the local ring number is 000A, so Cisco99B leaves.
The result on the Cisco99B screen was:
show log
Syslog logging: enabled (0 messages dropped, 0 flushes, 0 overruns)
Console logging: disabled
Monitor logging: level debugging, 0 messages logged
Trap logging: level informational, 27 message lines logged
Buffer logging: level debugging, 23 messages logged
--More--
Log Buffer (4096 bytes):
%LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface TokenRing0, changed state
to down
%LINK-5-CHANGED: Interface TokenRing0, changed state to initializing
%TR-3-BADRNGNUM: Unit 0, ring number (3745) doesn't match established
number (10).
%LANMGR-4-BADRNGNUM: Ring number mismatch on TokenRing0, shutting down the
interface.
%LINK-5-CHANGED: Interface TokenRing0, changed state to administratively down
%SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by console
%LINK-5-CHANGED: Interface TokenRing0, changed state to initializing
%TR-3-BADRNGNUM: Unit 0, ring number (3745) doesn't match established
number (10).
%LANMGR-4-BADRNGNUM: Ring number mismatch on TokenRing0, shutting down the
interface.
%LINK-5-CHANGED: Interface TokenRing0, changed state to administratively down
%SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by console
ROUTER2# exit
So, now we know! My hypothesis was correct. Thanks, Jim! Good work.
Priscilla
At 02:26 PM 11/10/00, you wrote:
>Priscilla
> Here is the data.
> I have included the NG Sniffer trace, a print out of the trace (just
>incase you do not have a token ring version)
> I also included the log of the second router that had a different
>ring number
>
> Here is what I did
>
> Started sniffer
>
> Set first router to set local ring number to 10 (using
>source-bridge 10 1 100)
> set second router to set local ring number to 3745 (using
>source-bridge 3745 1 100)
>
> Per the router log of the second router the router did not insert
>properly because of the ring number mismatch
>
> Jim Fickett
________________________
Priscilla Oppenheimer
http://www.priscilla.com
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
