RE: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076]
The SPF tree involves determining a least-cost path from the router the path will be originating from. Therefore you need to adjust your costs accordingly. As per example, Area0 is a low cost due to I presume Area0 would be over a high speed backbone. routerArouterB AREA0 55 AREA0 10 10 | | 10 10 routerC routerD AREA1 20-20 AREA1 >From Router A via router B to reach router D is cost of 15. >From Router A via router C to reach router D is cost of 30. Router B is now the preferred route. If it a test network, try playing around with the costs to do asymmetrical routing. -Original Message- From: Hire, Ejay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 2:02 PM To: Subject: RE: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076] Would Moving one of the AREA 1 Routers into (a new area) Area2 Fix this? -Original Message- From: Michael L. Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 6:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076] Good call I was going moreso by the diagram... "EA Louie" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Read carefully - routerA and routerB both have interfaces in Area0 and > Area1, which makes them both ABRs > > -e- > > - Original Message - > From: "Michael L. Williams" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 9:01 AM > Subject: Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076] > > > > Wait a second.. where are the ABRs?How can a router that > > communicates routes from one OSPF area to another not be an ABR? Am I > > missing something? > > > > Mike W. > > > > "Kevin Schwantz" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > routerArouterB > > > AREA0AREA0 > > > || > > > routerC routerD > > > AREA1-AREA1 > > > > > > > > > Since we are on the topic of OSPF, could someone help me out on the > > scenario > > > above? > > > > > > Routers A and B have interfaces in Area 0 and Area1. I want traffic > from > > > routerA destined for routerD to go via router B. This is not the case in > > my > > > network because I realise that routerA prefers Intra-Area routes and > thus > > > would route traffic to routerD via routerC. > > > What tweaks must I make in order to force the traffic from routerA to > > > routerD to go via routerB ? Someone suggested building a GRE tunnel > > between > > > routerA and routerB and then configure the tunnel to be in AREA1. > > > > > > Any suggestions? > > > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > ""W. Alan Robertson"" wrote in message > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > Guys, > > > > > > > > The actual traffic will not be routed up to area 0... Area 0 has been > > > > extended > > > > down to R2, so R2 is now a backbone router. R2 has interfaces in 3 > > areas > > > > now: > > > > Area1, Area2, and Area0 by means of it's virtual link. > > > > > > > > Any traffic originating in Area2 destined for Area1 will be routed > > > directly > > > > by > > > > R2. This satisfies the "Interarea traffic must traverse the backbone" > > > rule, > > > > because R2 *is* a backbone router. > > > > > > > > This is not theory... It is fact. > > > > > > > > Alan > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: "Andrew Larkins" > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 10:13 AM > > > > Subject: RE: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076] > > > > > > > > > > > > > agreedto area 0 then on to the intended area > > > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > > > From: Circusnuts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > > Sent: 28 May 2001 15:50 > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Subject: Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chuck- my answer is Yes. The traffic from the Virtual Linked > > psuedo-ABR > > > > > passes back to Area 0, before it's sent onto the intended Area (even > > if > > > > it's > > > > > directly connected). > > > > > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > > From: Chuck Larrieu > > > > > To: > > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2001 8:59 PM > > > > > Subject: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ever wonder what the CCIE candidates talk about on the CCIE list? > > > > > > > > > > > > The following message came through today. I thought the bright > folks > > > on > > > > > this > > > > > > list might be curious, and might want to venture an answer. > > > > > > > > > > > > Begin original question: > > > > > > > > > > > > Guys, > > > > > > > > > > > > I wonder if
RE: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076]
Kevin, I didn't read the whole thread!, It would be more of a cost issue if your where inter-area routing (as you know). Glancing at your thread, that's what I mentally thought even though it states several times that the problem was over intra-area routing. - I must read more slowly! >From what you say changing the area looks the only solution, though as I hate giving up on a solution how about this. If your destination networks on router D are Type 1 or Type 2 and summarisation is good you could implement static routing (weight 16) on router A in the routing table thus overriding OSPF weights value. If the static routes point to a loopback address on router B, then if router B fails the static routes would disappear from the routing table allowing the OSPF to take over thus providing a resilient route to router D via router C. The reason why I say on using a loopback is due to if router B fails or it's interface for area 0 fails router A will still retain the static routes in it routing table due to it's local interface for Area 0 will be up still up. It's not elegant, but if you desperately need to off load bandwidth / CPU utilisation via route C or you don't want to increase the size of Area 0 then this may be worth considering. Personally I prefer what you have done but I don't know your situation. I hope this helps! Regards Giles -Original Message- From: Peter Van Oene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 4:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076] As you are likely aware, running TE over area borders isn't an available option these days due to the loss of traffic engineering info at those borders. Hence, migrating to a single area might enhance your ability to engineer traffic in your network. I would just keep an eye on the utilization of your routers particularity if they are running multiple routing tables as your mpls vpn comment suggests. *** REPLY SEPARATOR *** On 5/31/2001 at 11:02 AM Kevin Schwantz wrote: >Giles, > >I don't think its a OSPF Cost problem. I tried it without avail. I am not >very sure but I believe OSPF will prefer Intra-Area routes despite having >an >alternate path that seemingly has a lower cost. Please correct me if I am >wrong. Could this be an administrative distance thing? >As much as I would have liked to come up with an ingenius solution, I was >not able to. >I have since changed Area 1 into Area 0. It works fine now but I have this >nagging feeling that something more constructive could have been done. The >solution I adopted seems more like a cheap work around. But I guess it >works >and that matters more. >By the way, the network is much bigger than what I have illustrated. It >consist of around 40 routers spanning over 16 countries. Its a private IP >network that runs on MPLS to provide VPN's. My next project would be to >implement traffic engineering. > >Kevin > >""Essame, Giles"" wrote in message >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >> The SPF tree involves determining a least-cost path from the router the >path >> will be originating from. Therefore you need to adjust your costs >> accordingly. >> >> As per example, Area0 is a low cost due to I presume Area0 would be over >a >> high speed backbone. >> routerArouterB >>AREA0 55 AREA0 >> 10 10 >> | | >> 10 10 >>routerC routerD >> AREA1 20-20 AREA1 >> >> From Router A via router B to reach router D is cost of 15. >> From Router A via router C to reach router D is cost of 30. >> Router B is now the preferred route. If it a test network, try playing >> around with the costs to do asymmetrical routing. >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Hire, Ejay [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 2:02 PM >> To: >> Subject: RE: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076] >> >> >> Would Moving one of the AREA 1 Routers into (a new area) Area2 Fix this? >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Michael L. Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2001 6:54 PM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076] >> >> >> Good call I was going moreso by the diagram... >> >> "EA Louie" wrote in message >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... >> > R
RE: Gigabit Ethernet Signal propagation. [7:6739]
Chris, FYI - taken from http://www.lanart.com/learning/whitepapers/gig_wp.htm In Ethernet, the smallest packet size allowed is 64 bytes (8 bits per byte = 512 bits). The purpose of establishing a minimum packet size was to ensure that a station could detect collisions at the furthest point of the network, allowing the CSMS/CD portion of the protocol to deal with it appropriately (referred to as the 512 bit-time rule). As speed increases by factors of 10 (10 Mbps to 100 Mbps to 1 Gbps), the distance that you can transmit and still properly detect collisions is decreased by a factor of 10. Consequently, at Gigabit speeds in a shared Ethernet environment, you are limited to about 20 meters over UTP. The Gigabit standard addresses this distance limitation issue by a method known as "carrier extension." Carrier extension effectively increases the packet size to 512 bytes (4096 bits), by adding "extension symbols" to increase the size of the packet to a size that can be detected by all devices on a Gigabit link up to 100 meters away. The end device then strips this additional data or "extension symbols" off when it is received. The problem is that increasing the packet size (adding 448 bytes of extension symbols) means that you have actually decreased the throughput to about 100 Mbps Fast Ethernet speed. (Sending larger amounts of data down a larger pipe nets you no significant gain.) To deal with this reduction in throughput, a method known as "packet bursting" is used in conjunction with carrier extension. Packet bursting improves the efficiency of carrier extension by decreasing the inter-packet gap when multiple packets are transmitted. (Reducing the amount of data you send down a larger pipe nets you a nominal gain.) However, even when both methods are used, throughput in half-duplex Gigabit remains hindered and never achieves full 1 Gbps speed. The bottom line is that half-duplex is possible but not recommended in Gigabit environments. Carrier detection and packet bursting are not required in a full-duplex Gigabit environment. Regards Giles -Original Message- From: Burnham, Chris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 12:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Gigabit Ethernet Signal propagation. [7:6739] Does Gig Ethernet conform to the same minimum frame sizes as general Ethernet ie 64 bytes.If so how does it accomodate late collisions when running over distances of 2km or more.??? Or is this not relevant as it will be point to point full duplex and effectively collision free? Please help it is giving me brain strain Chris Burnham, Systems Engineer, Delphis Consulting Plc. Tel: +(44) 020 7916 0200 Mob: +(44) 07799403576 [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are intended solely for the addressee and are confidential. They may also be legally privileged.Copyright in them is reserved by Delphis Consulting PLC ["Delphis"] and they must not be disclosed to, or used by, anyone other than the addressee.If you have received this e-mail and any accompanying files in error, you may not copy, publish or use them in any way and you should delete them from your system and notify us immediately.E-mails are not secure. Delphis does not accept responsibility for changes to e-mails that occur after they have been sent. Any opinions expressed in this e-mail may be personal to the author and may not necessarily reflect the opinions of Delphis ***> = THE INFORMATION IN THIS E-MAIL AND IN ANY ATTACHMENTS IS CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY BE PRIVILEGED. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, PLEASE DESTROY THIS MESSAGE AND NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY. YOU SHOULD NOT RETAIN, COPY OR USE THIS E-MAIL FOR ANY PURPOSE, NOR DISCLOSE ALL OR ANY PART OF ITS CONTENTS TO ANY OTHER PERSON. ANY VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THIS MESSAGE ARE THOSE OF THE INDIVIDUAL SENDER, EXCEPT WHERE THE SENDER SPECIFICALLY STATES THEM TO BE THE VIEWS OF LLOYD'S. LLOYD'S MAY MONITOR THE CONTENT OF E-MAILS SENT AND RECEIVED VIA ITS NETWORK FOR VIRUSES OR UNAUTHORISED USE AND FOR OTHER LAWFUL BUSINESS PURPOSES. mail06 = > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6742&t=6739 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: ISDN call Command [7:8351]
Scott you need the telephone number after your bri0/0 isdn call int bri0/0 234234234 to disconnet the call type isdn dis int bri0/0 all -Original Message- From: STRAND Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 4:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ISDN call Command [7:8351] I need to test if the bri interface used for DDR works without taking the serial interface down. (Don't ask me why, the reasons are political). So basically, I just want to see if it works. I've done the "sh isdn status" to check level 1 & 2 but is it possible to bring up an interface in this situation? How does the: isdn call int bri0/0 command work? I tried this with no luck. Thanks, Scott ***> = THE INFORMATION IN THIS E-MAIL AND IN ANY ATTACHMENTS IS CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY BE PRIVILEGED. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, PLEASE DESTROY THIS MESSAGE AND NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY. YOU SHOULD NOT RETAIN, COPY OR USE THIS E-MAIL FOR ANY PURPOSE, NOR DISCLOSE ALL OR ANY PART OF ITS CONTENTS TO ANY OTHER PERSON. ANY VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THIS MESSAGE ARE THOSE OF THE INDIVIDUAL SENDER, EXCEPT WHERE THE SENDER SPECIFICALLY STATES THEM TO BE THE VIEWS OF LLOYD'S. LLOYD'S MAY MONITOR THE CONTENT OF E-MAILS SENT AND RECEIVED VIA ITS NETWORK FOR VIRUSES OR UNAUTHORISED USE AND FOR OTHER LAWFUL BUSINESS PURPOSES. mail06 = > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=8527&t=8351 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: how to track down unused ports on a switch [7:9213]
[ The following text is in the "iso-8859-1" character set. ] [ Your display is set for the "US-ASCII" character set. ] [ Some characters may be displayed incorrectly. ] David, The software that should answer all your problems for inventory management is called 'eye of the storm' from http://www.entuity.com/ Give them a ring and ask for a evaluation copy (NT or Unix). Believe me, you won't want to give it back!!! HTH Giles -Original Message- From: Hennen, David [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 6:05 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: how to track down unused ports on a switch [7:9213] Does anyone have or know of a tool that will track unused ports on a switch over time. My employer has a couple of thousand switch ports where I work and we have a pretty mobile work force, ie people switch cubes a lot it seems. Sometimes we don't find out about a move until after when someone calls to get two network connections in their new cube. We typically accomodate them by adding new patch cables but it's difficult to track down their old connections and pull them out, so we end up using a lot of patch cables. If there was a way to find out all the ports on a switch that haven't been active for the last month that would be helpful. I thought about trying to use snmp and write some type of list out to excel but this isn't my forte' and hopefully someone else has a better solution Thanks if you can help, Dave H ***> = THE INFORMATION IN THIS E-MAIL AND IN ANY ATTACHMENTS IS CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY BE PRIVILEGED. IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, PLEASE DESTROY THIS MESSAGE AND NOTIFY THE SENDER IMMEDIATELY. YOU SHOULD NOT RETAIN, COPY OR USE THIS E-MAIL FOR ANY PURPOSE, NOR DISCLOSE ALL OR ANY PART OF ITS CONTENTS TO ANY OTHER PERSON. ANY VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THIS MESSAGE ARE THOSE OF THE INDIVIDUAL SENDER, EXCEPT WHERE THE SENDER SPECIFICALLY STATES THEM TO BE THE VIEWS OF LLOYD'S. LLOYD'S MAY MONITOR THE CONTENT OF E-MAILS SENT AND RECEIVED VIA ITS NETWORK FOR VIRUSES OR UNAUTHORISED USE AND FOR OTHER LAWFUL BUSINESS PURPOSES. mail06 = > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=9327&t=9213 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
