I hate to admit it, but yes, I've seen this work (we needed to get 802.1q VLANs across a link that couldn't handle them). Ugly as sin, though :).
Rgds, - I. On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, JEK wrote: > Well guys I think that should do it for the config, tell me if anything > looks wrong. > Also as a side note you may also want to use an ACL in the range of 700-799 > (MAC Address Acl) to limit what traffic that you want to be sent over the > dlsw > circuits. I hope this info helps and all my syntax is correct. Thanks, > > - jek > > Router A > ! > hostname RouterA > dlsw local-peer peer-id 10.10.10.254 > dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 10.10.20.254 > dlsw bridge-group 1 > ! > interface Tunnel0 > ip unnumbered Ethern0 > tunnel source Ethernet0 > tunnel destination 128.29.183.247 > ! > interface Ethernet0 > ip address 10.10.10.254 255.255.255.0 > bridge-group 1 > ! > interface Serial0 > ip address 128.29.182.247 255.255.255.252 > ! > bridge 1 protocol ieee > bridge 1 route ip > no bridge 1 bridge ip > ! > > > Router B > ! > hostname RouterB > dlsw local-peer peer-id 10.10.20.254 > dlsw remote-peer 0 tcp 10.10.10.254 > dlsw bridge-group 1 > ! > interface Tunnel0 > ip unnumbered Ethern0 > tunnel source Ethernet0 > tunnel destination 128.29.182.247 > ! > interface Ethernet0 > ip address 10.10.20.254 255.255.255.0 > bridge-group 1 > ! > interface Serial0 > ip address 128.29.183.247 255.255.255.252 > ! > bridge 1 protocol ieee > bridge 1 route ip > no bridge 1 bridge ip > ! > > > > wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > how do you configure this with dlsw? > > > > 10.10.10.x --(R1)--(public network)--(R2)---10.10.10.x > > > > > > ""Jason"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > Is this something you just want to do for the sake of doing? If so, I > say > > > have at it. Will it work, don't know. I have never tried it. If you > are > > > looking to do this to fulfill a production requirement I would question > > why > > > you weren't looking at using DLSW? > > > > > > Jason > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > > Eric Waguespack > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2002 9:38 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: is it possible to bridge accross a tunnel? [7:33567] > > > > > > > > > ok, I have looked into this, and supposedly the answer > > > is "yes" but the config is "unsupported" > > > > > > here is the network diagram > > > > > > > > > 10.10.10.x --(R1)--(public network)--(R2)---10.10.10.x > > > > > > this is supposed to do it but i can't seem to make it > > > work: > > > > > > >int tunnel 2 > > > >no ip addr > > > >tunnel source eth 0 > > > >tunnel destination 128.29.183.247 > > > >bridge-group 1 > > > > > > > > > should this work? what will work? anything? do i need > > > to do l2f instead? what did you have for breakfast? > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > -Eric > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! > > > http://auctions.yahoo.com -- Ian Henderson CCNA, CCNP Network Engineer, iiNet Limited Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=33678&t=33567 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
