Maybe I'm missing something, but in looking at your config and cross-referencing the rules of the lab, I can't understand why you didn't just create two subinterfaces on R1.
-----Original Message-----
From: James Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2000 5:50 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Frame Relay Problem
Hi All,
I hope someone can shed some light on the problem I have come across in the
following scenario :
Three routers, R1,R2 and R3 all connected via a Frame Relay cloud with a
router in the middle doing frame relay switching. The frame switch is _not_
fully meshed. R1 is acting as the hub with R2 and R3 being spokes off R1.
Hence there is a PVC betweenR1 and R2 and a PVC between R1 and R3. There is
_no_ PVC between R2 and R3.
The particular lab exercise here specifies that each router much be able to
ping every other router in the frame cloud. BUT the use of the 'frame-relay
map' command is forbidden, and only R1 can be configured using a subinterface.
As I have it configured R1 can ping both R2 and R3 as expected. However,
both R2 and R3 can only ping R1 (the hub) yet cannot ping each other. The
question stipulates you should use routing and not Layer2 to Layer3
mapping. A debug on the ping from R2 to R3 shows that there is no map entry
for R3 hence encapsulation failed. A look at 'sh frame map' shows there is
only 1 entry and it is for R1. This sh frame map is identical on R2 and R3.
So the question is, how can I get R2 and R3 to be able to ping each other
using routing and not the frame relay map command.
It's got two of us here studying for our CCIE stumped, so im hoping someone
out there has an idea as to how this can be accomplished.
Also, as this is for the CCIE, static routes are not an option.
Cheers.
Jim.
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
