did you test this? I can't seem to get it to work on
my routers.

another thing, my network looks like this
10.10.18.200
--(R1)-192.168.0.1--------192.168.0.2-(R2)--10.10.18.201

yours:
10.10.20.254 --(R1)-128.29.183.247--- (R3)---
128.29.182.247-(R2) --10.10.10.254


thanks alot for your help so far.

Eric


""JEK""  wrote in message
news:...
> 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
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! 
http://auctions.yahoo.com




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=33765&t=33567
--------------------------------------------------
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