Re: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
I think support for /31 masks was introduced in 12.2.8 though I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm mistaken;) Dave s vermill wrote: > 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 -- 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=62250&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kaj J. Niemi) wrote: > > In mail.net.groupstudy.pro, you wrote: > > > 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. > > It works well on all platforms I've used it on. Introduced in > 12.2(2)T, Cool! > ie. a long time ago ;-) Yeah, most of my clients are of the "if it aint broke, don't upgrade it" mentality. And a lot of my lab stuff doesn't have enough memory to go beyond 12.1. I'm often times 6 or more months behind the curve on IOS. Thanks for the update. > > > > // kaj > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62219&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
In mail.net.groupstudy.pro, you wrote: > 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. It works well on all platforms I've used it on. Introduced in 12.2(2)T, ie. a long time ago ;-) // kaj Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62218&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
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]
Re: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
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 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=62207&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
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 Yes, I think you have it. But I was interested in some other suggestions that were made. If, on the numbered end, you entered a static route to the unnumbered interface IP using the outgoing interface, it seems like it might work. Something like: 'ip route 192.168.100.1 s0' where 192.168.100.1 was the IP of the interface being referenced in the 'ip unnumbered' statement and s0 attaches to the unnumbered interface. But something might break in the routing protocol. Again, I think it was assumed that you're going to implement unnumbered on both ends of the link in order to realize address conservation. There might also be some exchanges of information between the unnumbered interfaces that we're not aware of. An asymetrical configuration might break that. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62199&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
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 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62197&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
Deepak N wrote: > > HI All > I have simple configuration of HDLC connected back to back. > If i give ip unnumbered at one end and the static ip address at > the other end, I cant ping the either end. But when i give show > ip int brief, it shows the line and protocol are up. > If i give ip unnumbered at both ends, now i am able to ping > either end. > could anybody help me out in this. > > Regards > Deepak This stuff is impossible to remember. Everytime I think I have it committed to memory, I wind up back at: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk648/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094e8d.shtml An interesting excerpt: "The only real disadvantage that the unnumbered interface suffers from is that it is unavailable for remote testing and management." But more importantly: When unnumbered is used, a route that is learned via the unnumbered interace is placed into the routing table using the unnumbered _interface_ it came in on as opposed to the next hop IP. If the next hop IP were to be used, problems would arrise because tit isn't directly attached (everything eventually has to boil down to a directly attached interface so the packet can be offloaded). The next hop IP is on the back side of the distant-end unnumbered interface. Unnumbered was meant to conserve address space on p-t-p serial links. It was assumed that both ends would implement it. In the case of a numbered interface, the "use the interface instead of next hop IP" logic isn't implemented. Thus, the router inserts the next hop (which is behind the unnumbered inteface on the other end). The problem, of course, is that the next hop isn't directly attached. And no special logic has been implemented to compensate. I think I got that right. Read the link and see if it adds up. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62194&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
Hi Ladrach I tried with the route statement. it worked perfectly. but the problem is when i am running the routing protocol. i have given detailed configs for 3 different cases in the previous mails. Regards Deepak Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62193&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
If it is a loopback address lets say 192.168.1.2 255.255.255.252 the router will see the netblock local to the router. Lets say the other end is 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.252 Point-to-point. Try putting a route statement ip route 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.255 out the interface. This creates a more specific route for that IP. Daniel Ladrach CCNP,CCNA WorldCom -Original Message- From: Deepak N [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 4:07 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134] HI All I have simple configuration of HDLC connected back to back. If i give ip unnumbered at one end and the static ip address at the other end, I cant ping the either end. But when i give show ip int brief, it shows the line and protocol are up. If i give ip unnumbered at both ends, now i am able to ping either end. could anybody help me out in this. Regards Deepak Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62181&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
Do these labs for better understanding... http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk648/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a 0080094e8d.shtml WATCH THE WORD WRAP! Deepak N wrote: > > Hi all > > The following are the configurations of the routers and the > ping outputs. > I have given 3 cases. > > 1) When ip unnumbered at one end and static routes are defined > > sdmheadend#sh run > Building configuration... > > Current configuration : 1115 bytes > ! > version 12.2 > service timestamps debug datetime msec > service timestamps log datetime msec > no service password-encryption > ! > hostname sdmheadend > ! > ! > ! > ! > ip subnet-zero > ! > ! > ! > ip audit notify log > ip audit po max-events 100 > ! > ! > ! > voice call carrier capacity active > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > mta receive maximum-recipients 0 > ! > ! > ! > ! > interface FastEthernet0/0 > ip address 172.20.110.10 255.255.255.192 > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface FastEthernet0/1 > no ip address > shutdown > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface ATM1/0 > no ip address > shutdown > no atm ilmi-keepalive > dsl operating-mode auto > no fair-queue > ! > interface FastEthernet1/0 > no ip address > shutdown > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface Serial1/0 > ip address 12.12.12.1 255.255.255.0 > no fair-queue > clockrate 200 > ! > interface FastEthernet1/1 > no ip address > shutdown > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface Serial1/1 > no ip address > shutdown > clockrate 200 > ! > ip classless > ip route 200.200.200.0 255.255.255.0 Serial1/0 > ip http server > ! > ! > ! > ! > call rsvp-sync > ! > ! > mgcp profile default > ! > dial-peer cor custom > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > line con 0 > line aux 0 > line vty 0 4 > ! > ! > end > > > sdmheadend# ping 200.200.200.11 > > Type escape sequence to abort. > Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 200.200.200.11, timeout is 2 > seconds: > ! > Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = > 1/2/4 ms > sdmheadend# > > > > > > > switchrouter#sh run > Building configuration... > > Current configuration : 746 bytes > ! > version 12.2 > service timestamps debug uptime > service timestamps log uptime > no service password-encryption > ! > hostname switchrouter > ! > ! > memory-size iomem 5 > ip subnet-zero > ! > ! > ! > ip audit notify log > ip audit po max-events 100 > ip ssh time-out 120 > ip ssh authentication-retries 3 > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > interface Loopback0 > ip address 200.200.200.11 255.255.255.0 > ! > interface FastEthernet0/0 > no ip address > shutdown > speed auto > ! > interface Serial0/0 > ip unnumbered Loopback0 > no fair-queue > ! > interface Serial0/1 > no ip address > shutdown > ! > ip classless > ip route 12.12.12.0 255.255.255.0 Serial0/0 > no ip http server > ip pim bidir-enable > ! > ! > ! > call rsvp-sync > ! > dial-peer cor custom > ! > ! > ! > ! > line con 0 > line aux 0 > line vty 0 4 > ! > no scheduler allocate > end > > switchrouter#ping 12.12.12.1 > > Type escape sequence to abort. > Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 12.12.12.1, timeout is 2 > seconds: > ! > Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = > 1/2/4 ms > switchrouter# > > > > > > > > > > 2) When routing protocol RIP is running > > > sdmheadend#sh run > Building configuration... > > Current configuration : 1099 bytes > ! > version 12.2 > service timestamps debug datetime msec > service timestamps log datetime msec > no service password-encryption > ! > hostname sdmheadend > ! > ! > ! > ! > ip subnet-zero > ! > ! > ! > ip audit notify log > ip audit po max-events 100 > ! > ! > ! > voice call carrier capacity active > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > mta receive maximum-recipients 0 > ! > ! > ! > ! > interface FastEthernet0/0 > ip address 172.20.110.10 255.255.255.192 > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface FastEthernet0/1 > no ip address > shutdown > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface ATM1/0 > no ip address > shutdown > no atm ilmi-keepalive > dsl operating-mode auto > no fair-queue > ! > interface FastEthernet1/0 > no ip address > shutdown > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface Serial1/0 > ip address 12.12.12.1 255.255.255.0 > no fair-queue > clockrate 200 > ! > interface FastEthernet1/1 > no ip address > shutdown > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface Serial1/1 > no ip address > shutdown > clockrate 200 > ! > router rip > network 12.0.0.0 > ! > ip classless > ip http server > ! > ! > ! > ! > call rsvp-sync > ! > ! > mgcp profile default > ! > dial-peer cor custom > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > line con 0 > line aux 0 > line vty 0 4 > ! > ! > end > > sdmheadend# ping 200.200.200.11 > > Type escape sequence to abort. > Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 200.200.200.11, timeout is 2 > seconds: > . > Success rate is 0 percent (0/5) > sdmheadend# > > > > switchrouter#sh run > Building configuration... > > Current configuration : 738 bytes >
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
Hi when i did debug ip icmp, i got the message that its unroutable when one end is numbered and the other end is unnumbered. This is expected because it doesnt have the next hop ip address to reach. But i expect the same behaviour when both are unnumbered. But it is able to send the rip updates and receive also therby reaching both ends. This is somewhat strange Regards Deepak Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62159&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
HI Claudio Please find the following for the different cases i mentioned. Regards Deepak 1)When ip unnumbered at one end and static routes are defined sdmheadend#sh ip rou Codes: C - connected, S - static, I - IGRP, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2 E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2, E - EGP i - IS-IS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2, ia - IS-IS inter area * - candidate default, U - per-user static route, o - ODR P - periodic downloaded static route Gateway of last resort is not set S200.200.200.0/24 is directly connected, Serial1/0 172.20.0.0/26 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 172.20.110.0 is directly connected, FastEthernet0/0 12.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 12.12.12.0 is directly connected, Serial1/0 sdmheadend# switchrouter#sh ip rou Codes: C - connected, S - static, I - IGRP, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2 E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2, E - EGP i - IS-IS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2, ia - IS-IS inter area * - candidate default, U - per-user static route, o - ODR P - periodic downloaded static route Gateway of last resort is not set C200.200.200.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback0 12.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets S 12.12.12.0 is directly connected, Serial0/0 switchrouter# 2)When routing protocol RIP is running sdmheadend#sh ip rout Codes: C - connected, S - static, I - IGRP, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2 E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2, E - EGP i - IS-IS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2, ia - IS-IS inter area * - candidate default, U - per-user static route, o - ODR P - periodic downloaded static route Gateway of last resort is not set 172.20.0.0/26 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 172.20.110.0 is directly connected, FastEthernet0/0 12.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 12.12.12.0 is directly connected, Serial1/0 sdmheadend# switchrouter#sh ip rou Codes: C - connected, S - static, I - IGRP, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2 E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2, E - EGP i - IS-IS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2, ia - IS-IS inter area * - candidate default, U - per-user static route, o - ODR P - periodic downloaded static route Gateway of last resort is not set C200.200.200.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback0 switchrouter# 3)When both sides are unnumbered and running routing protocol sdmheadend#sh ip rou Codes: C - connected, S - static, I - IGRP, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2 E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2, E - EGP i - IS-IS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2, ia - IS-IS inter area * - candidate default, U - per-user static route, o - ODR P - periodic downloaded static route Gateway of last resort is not set R200.200.200.0/24 [120/1] via 200.200.200.11, 00:00:03, Serial1/0 20.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 20.20.20.0 is directly connected, Loopback0 172.20.0.0/26 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 172.20.110.0 is directly connected, FastEthernet0/0 sdmheadend# switchrouter#sh ip rou Codes: C - connected, S - static, I - IGRP, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2 E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2, E - EGP i - IS-IS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2, ia - IS-IS inter area * - candidate default, U - per-user static route, o - ODR P - periodic downloaded static route Gateway of last resort is not set C200.200.200.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback0 20.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 2 subnets, 2 masks R 20.20.20.0/32 [120/1] via 20.20.20.1, 00:00:01, Serial0/0 R 20.0.0.0/8 [120/1] via 20.20.20.1, 00:00:01, Serial0/0 switchrouter# Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62157&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
So it fails when you have numbered on one side and unnumbered on the other side and you are running RIP? What did "show ip route" tell you when the problem occured? Were the relevant routes in both routers' tables? What address does sdmheadend use to send the echo? If it's using 172.20.110.10, then it won't work because switchrouter doesn't have a route back to that. It only has a route back to 12.0.0.0? With extended ping you can set the ip address that the router should use. Also, enable debug ip icmp (on a non-operational router anyway) and see what's really happening. Also, see the last message from Claudio. It may have something to do with sdmheadend not having a valid next hop address since its next hop is unnumbered, but then we would expect when they are both unnumbered and the loopbacks are in different subnets, there would be a problem too, and there isn't. Anyway, "show ip route" should tell you a lot. Priscilla Deepak N wrote: > > Hi all > > The following are the configurations of the routers and the > ping outputs. > I have given 3 cases. > > 1) When ip unnumbered at one end and static routes are defined > > sdmheadend#sh run > Building configuration... > > Current configuration : 1115 bytes > ! > version 12.2 > service timestamps debug datetime msec > service timestamps log datetime msec > no service password-encryption > ! > hostname sdmheadend > ! > ! > ! > ! > ip subnet-zero > ! > ! > ! > ip audit notify log > ip audit po max-events 100 > ! > ! > ! > voice call carrier capacity active > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > mta receive maximum-recipients 0 > ! > ! > ! > ! > interface FastEthernet0/0 > ip address 172.20.110.10 255.255.255.192 > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface FastEthernet0/1 > no ip address > shutdown > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface ATM1/0 > no ip address > shutdown > no atm ilmi-keepalive > dsl operating-mode auto > no fair-queue > ! > interface FastEthernet1/0 > no ip address > shutdown > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface Serial1/0 > ip address 12.12.12.1 255.255.255.0 > no fair-queue > clockrate 200 > ! > interface FastEthernet1/1 > no ip address > shutdown > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface Serial1/1 > no ip address > shutdown > clockrate 200 > ! > ip classless > ip route 200.200.200.0 255.255.255.0 Serial1/0 > ip http server > ! > ! > ! > ! > call rsvp-sync > ! > ! > mgcp profile default > ! > dial-peer cor custom > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > line con 0 > line aux 0 > line vty 0 4 > ! > ! > end > > > sdmheadend# ping 200.200.200.11 > > Type escape sequence to abort. > Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 200.200.200.11, timeout is 2 > seconds: > ! > Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = > 1/2/4 ms > sdmheadend# > > > > > > > switchrouter#sh run > Building configuration... > > Current configuration : 746 bytes > ! > version 12.2 > service timestamps debug uptime > service timestamps log uptime > no service password-encryption > ! > hostname switchrouter > ! > ! > memory-size iomem 5 > ip subnet-zero > ! > ! > ! > ip audit notify log > ip audit po max-events 100 > ip ssh time-out 120 > ip ssh authentication-retries 3 > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > interface Loopback0 > ip address 200.200.200.11 255.255.255.0 > ! > interface FastEthernet0/0 > no ip address > shutdown > speed auto > ! > interface Serial0/0 > ip unnumbered Loopback0 > no fair-queue > ! > interface Serial0/1 > no ip address > shutdown > ! > ip classless > ip route 12.12.12.0 255.255.255.0 Serial0/0 > no ip http server > ip pim bidir-enable > ! > ! > ! > call rsvp-sync > ! > dial-peer cor custom > ! > ! > ! > ! > line con 0 > line aux 0 > line vty 0 4 > ! > no scheduler allocate > end > > switchrouter#ping 12.12.12.1 > > Type escape sequence to abort. > Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 12.12.12.1, timeout is 2 > seconds: > ! > Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = > 1/2/4 ms > switchrouter# > > > > > > > > > > 2) When routing protocol RIP is running > > > sdmheadend#sh run > Building configuration... > > Current configuration : 1099 bytes > ! > version 12.2 > service timestamps debug datetime msec > service timestamps log datetime msec > no service password-encryption > ! > hostname sdmheadend > ! > ! > ! > ! > ip subnet-zero > ! > ! > ! > ip audit notify log > ip audit po max-events 100 > ! > ! > ! > voice call carrier capacity active > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > ! > mta receive maximum-recipients 0 > ! > ! > ! > ! > interface FastEthernet0/0 > ip address 172.20.110.10 255.255.255.192 > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface FastEthernet0/1 > no ip address > shutdown > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface ATM1/0 > no ip address > shutdown > no atm ilmi-keepalive > dsl operating-mode auto > no fair-queue > ! > interface FastEthernet1/0 > no ip address > shutdown > duplex auto > speed auto > ! > interface Serial1
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
Hi Give us a look at the routing table from both routers. The router with the configured ip address on the Serial interface does not know how to get to the next hop address. Do you see in the routing table the next-hop address or the outbound interface? see you Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62151&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
Hi all The following are the configurations of the routers and the ping outputs. I have given 3 cases. 1) When ip unnumbered at one end and static routes are defined sdmheadend#sh run Building configuration... Current configuration : 1115 bytes ! version 12.2 service timestamps debug datetime msec service timestamps log datetime msec no service password-encryption ! hostname sdmheadend ! ! ! ! ip subnet-zero ! ! ! ip audit notify log ip audit po max-events 100 ! ! ! voice call carrier capacity active ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! mta receive maximum-recipients 0 ! ! ! ! interface FastEthernet0/0 ip address 172.20.110.10 255.255.255.192 duplex auto speed auto ! interface FastEthernet0/1 no ip address shutdown duplex auto speed auto ! interface ATM1/0 no ip address shutdown no atm ilmi-keepalive dsl operating-mode auto no fair-queue ! interface FastEthernet1/0 no ip address shutdown duplex auto speed auto ! interface Serial1/0 ip address 12.12.12.1 255.255.255.0 no fair-queue clockrate 200 ! interface FastEthernet1/1 no ip address shutdown duplex auto speed auto ! interface Serial1/1 no ip address shutdown clockrate 200 ! ip classless ip route 200.200.200.0 255.255.255.0 Serial1/0 ip http server ! ! ! ! call rsvp-sync ! ! mgcp profile default ! dial-peer cor custom ! ! ! ! ! line con 0 line aux 0 line vty 0 4 ! ! end sdmheadend# ping 200.200.200.11 Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 200.200.200.11, timeout is 2 seconds: ! Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/4 ms sdmheadend# switchrouter#sh run Building configuration... Current configuration : 746 bytes ! version 12.2 service timestamps debug uptime service timestamps log uptime no service password-encryption ! hostname switchrouter ! ! memory-size iomem 5 ip subnet-zero ! ! ! ip audit notify log ip audit po max-events 100 ip ssh time-out 120 ip ssh authentication-retries 3 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! interface Loopback0 ip address 200.200.200.11 255.255.255.0 ! interface FastEthernet0/0 no ip address shutdown speed auto ! interface Serial0/0 ip unnumbered Loopback0 no fair-queue ! interface Serial0/1 no ip address shutdown ! ip classless ip route 12.12.12.0 255.255.255.0 Serial0/0 no ip http server ip pim bidir-enable ! ! ! call rsvp-sync ! dial-peer cor custom ! ! ! ! line con 0 line aux 0 line vty 0 4 ! no scheduler allocate end switchrouter#ping 12.12.12.1 Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 12.12.12.1, timeout is 2 seconds: ! Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/4 ms switchrouter# 2) When routing protocol RIP is running sdmheadend#sh run Building configuration... Current configuration : 1099 bytes ! version 12.2 service timestamps debug datetime msec service timestamps log datetime msec no service password-encryption ! hostname sdmheadend ! ! ! ! ip subnet-zero ! ! ! ip audit notify log ip audit po max-events 100 ! ! ! voice call carrier capacity active ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! mta receive maximum-recipients 0 ! ! ! ! interface FastEthernet0/0 ip address 172.20.110.10 255.255.255.192 duplex auto speed auto ! interface FastEthernet0/1 no ip address shutdown duplex auto speed auto ! interface ATM1/0 no ip address shutdown no atm ilmi-keepalive dsl operating-mode auto no fair-queue ! interface FastEthernet1/0 no ip address shutdown duplex auto speed auto ! interface Serial1/0 ip address 12.12.12.1 255.255.255.0 no fair-queue clockrate 200 ! interface FastEthernet1/1 no ip address shutdown duplex auto speed auto ! interface Serial1/1 no ip address shutdown clockrate 200 ! router rip network 12.0.0.0 ! ip classless ip http server ! ! ! ! call rsvp-sync ! ! mgcp profile default ! dial-peer cor custom ! ! ! ! ! line con 0 line aux 0 line vty 0 4 ! ! end sdmheadend# ping 200.200.200.11 Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 200.200.200.11, timeout is 2 seconds: . Success rate is 0 percent (0/5) sdmheadend# switchrouter#sh run Building configuration... Current configuration : 738 bytes ! version 12.2 service timestamps debug uptime service timestamps log uptime no service password-encryption ! hostname switchrouter ! ! memory-size iomem 5 ip subnet-zero ! ! ! ip audit notify log ip audit po max-events 100 ip ssh time-out 120 ip ssh authentication-retries 3 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! interface Loopback0 ip address 200.200.200.11 255.255.255.0 ! interface FastEthernet0/0 no ip address shutdown speed auto ! interface Serial0/0 ip unnumbered Loopback0 no fair-queue ! interface Serial0/1 no ip address shutdown ! router rip network 200.200.200.0 ! ip classless no ip http server ip pim bidir-enable ! ! ! call rsvp-sync ! dial-peer cor custom ! ! ! ! line con 0 line aux 0 line vty 0 4 ! no scheduler allocate end switchrouter#ping 12.12.12.1 Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 12.12.12.1, timeout is
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
Hi What kind of routing protocol are you using? Ospf can not build an adjacency this way. With other routing protocols you should be able to exchange routing tables. But you won't be able to send traffic, because the router does not know where the next-hop address is. So you still need this static route to tell the router where the next-hop address is reachable. see you Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62143&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
Which is failing to get to the other side? The ping (echo) or the ping reply (echo reply). Pinging could fail for either reason. Debug icmp and you might get more info. Also, send us your configs. Help us help you. Priscilla Deepak N wrote: > > Hi Claudio > Thanks for quick response. > But i have tried that options. i defined a static ip route > to the network on the other end through the connecting > interface.it did work. > But when i am using the routing protocol, i am not able to ping > either end. But if i make the other end also unnumbered, n run > the routing protocol, then i am able to ping either end. > > Regards > Deepak Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62142&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
Hi Claudio Thanks for quick response. But i have tried that options. i defined a static ip route to the network on the other end through the connecting interface.it did work. But when i am using the routing protocol, i am not able to ping either end. But if i make the other end also unnumbered, n run the routing protocol, then i am able to ping either end. Regards Deepak Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62137&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: IP unnumbered for HDLC connection [7:62134]
Hi Deepak When you configure "ip unnnumbered" on an interfaces it looks like an interface with a /0 mask. On the other side with a configured ip address on the interface you have a different mask. So the two connected interfaces don't belong to the same network. What you could do is to configure on the router with the static ip address a route outwards the connecting interface for the other router's network. But I have never tried this before. The interface an line protocol will come undependently of the configured ip address. see you Claudio Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=62135&t=62134 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
