Thank you for the response. Another peice of the puzzle is that I believe there are two way to influence the EIGRP Table. I could increase the 10.x.x.x tunnel bandwidth or I could advertise the 64.200.x.x network into the EIGRP metric. Presently the 64.200.x.x network is not advertised in the eigrp table, only the 10.x.x.x is. I believe this is a situation of two way to 'skin' the cat. Just wondering what way is preferred over the other.
To further convolude the situation I have another engineer here that believe the delay should be manipulated instead of the bandwidth. Any suggestions are appreciated. Cheers, Jamie ----- Original Message ----- From: "Georgescu, Aurelian" Date: Friday, January 10, 2003 11:21 am Subject: RE: : Influencing EIGRP to use GRE tunnels over Serial link [7:60834] > You have to put a "bandwidth" statement under the tunnel > interfaces as well, > with a higher value than FR. > > Aurelian Georgescu > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 2:00 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: : Influencing EIGRP to use GRE tunnels over Serial link > [7:60834] > Hello all, > > I have a question. I have gre tunnels going through MPLS running > 1.544mbps,running EIGRP. The secondary links are Frame Relay > links running at 256kbps > per link. Presently EIGRP has calculated the best link to be the > SprintLink as there are bandwidth statements in the frame relay > subinterface on > the remote site: > > Remote Site In Tampa: > interface Serial0/0.2 point-to-point > description "Connect to Seattle" > bandwidth 256 > ip address 192.168.228.253 255.255.255.0 > no ip mroute-cache > no cdp enable > frame-relay interface-dlci 41 > > interface Tunnel1 > description "Tampa Tunnel to Seattle" > ip address 10.0.48.6 255.255.255.252 > tunnel source Serial0/1 > tunnel destination 64.200.134.18 > ! > The Tamp Site connects with Seattle Hub with these configs: > > interface Tunnel1 > description "Seattle Tunnel to Tampa" > ip address 10.0.48.5 255.255.255.252 > tunnel source Serial2/0 > tunnel destination 64.200.118.162 > end > > interface Serial0/0.8 point-to-point > description "Seattle to Tampa" > bandwidth 256 > ip address 192.168.228.254 255.255.255.0 > no ip route-cache > no ip mroute-cache > no cdp enable > frame-relay interface-dlci 39 > > I believe the best way to influence EIGRP would be to add a bandwidth > statement to the tunnel or the interface to which the tunnel is > applied to. > > One other question. T1 1.544mbps would be 193000 in the bandwidth > statement?.. believe so ..but having a brain fart right now. > > Thank you for your help. > > Cheers, > > Jamie Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=60840&t=60840 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
