MADMAN wrote: > > Glad you got it figured out and I hope you learned some > reason(s) not > to do unnumbered. I can't think of and good reasons for it and > if you > running out of addresses I have an RFC full of them for you;)
Dave, I heard rumor to the effect that Cisco would introduce /31 mask support for serial p-t-p links. Anyone tried that yet? I keep forgeting to when on a router with shiny new IOS. Scott > > Dave > > Deepak N wrote: > > Hi Vermill > > Now I got the point. So when i am using the numbered > interface, the router > > tries to reach the next hop via the next hop ip address, in > my case it is > > behind the directly connected interface.But it has no way of > finding the > > next hop ip address behind the unnumbered interface. So it > was not able to > > reach the other end. While both are unnumbered, the routes > were installed > > based on the outgoing interface. > > > > Thank you all for helping me out to find the solution. > > > > Thanks n regards > > Deepak > -- > David Madland > CCIE# 2016 > Sr. Network Engineer > Qwest Communications > 612-664-3367 > > "You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer." > --Winston > Churchill > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62214&t=62134 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
