Here's the situation:  we have a branch with a 2620 router and a T-1
frame relay circuit.  As a backup, we have added a RADSL line and we
want to put a 675 or 678 router at the branch.  The 675 will be
connected to a switch that is connected to the 2620, and the 675 will be
in its own VLAN.

The DSL circuits (there are actually over 30) are muxed to an ATM T-1
connecting to an ATM port adapter on a 7513 here at our headquarters.  I
thought I understood how to configure this until I actually started to
do it.  :-)

I was expecting to use point-to-point interfaces (just like our F/R
network) and aal5snap encapsulation.  However, it appears that the 675
can't do that or I just can't figure out how to do it.  I can't even
figure out how to set the IP address of the WAN interface on the 675.  I
*did* see how to set the ppp ipcp address for the WAN interface, but I'm
assuming that means I have to use PPPoA.  If that's the case, how in the
heck do I configure the 7513 ATM interface to handle up to 50
point-to-point subinterfaces using PPPoA?  For encapsulation, do I use
aal5mux or aal5ciscoppp?  What are the differences?

I've been searching CCO for hours and I haven't found much that is very
helpful so far.  Every configuration example assumes a different
situation and topology than ours.

To make matters worse, we are using VLSM and wanted to run RIP v2 on
the 675.  However, it sounds like RIP v2 is quite broken and we'd be
forced to use RIP v1.  That's bad news.  Am I screwed?  <g>

Is there another router that would be better for this than the 675?  I
looked at the 827 and it seems to be exactly what we want except for one
thing:  Qwest is using CAP on these lines and the 827 does DMT only. 
Arg....  I'm trying to contact some technical people there but so far I
haven't had much luck.

Do any of you have any experience with this sort of thing?

As usual, many thanks!

John

_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to