Help In T1 CSU/DSU [7:64962]
Hi all I have T1 Csu/dsu card on 2691 platform Whenever I execute any service module command it gives the following error Example:command given service module t1 clock source internal %Serive moduule command failed,Lock timeout error Can any body guide me out what is this error why I am unable to execute the commands Thanx in advance Monu Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64962t=64962 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Help In T1 CSU/DSU [7:64962]
Sorry the exact error is %Serive module command failed,Lock obtain timeout Monu Sekhon wrote: Hi all I have T1 Csu/dsu card on 2691 platform Whenever I execute any service module command it gives the following error Example:command given service module t1 clock source internal %Serive moduule command failed,Lock timeout error Can any body guide me out what is this error why I am unable to execute the commands Thanx in advance Monu Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64963t=64962 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Frame-Relay issue [7:63446]
Hi Deepak Let me tell u that ur interface might be adminstratively down when u cut pasted the config, Just make it up and then cut paste :-) and I have now came to conclusion after research work as It takes some time to shut the interface and bring back up so times get timed out in that case sometimes. Just try shut and no shut see it takes some time to make interface up. similarly I had ppp connection so when i cut paste my config there then also the interface does not negotiate ip address due to this reason only, as shut and no shut takes time, sometimes commands timeout in that case.as shutting till the interupt goes ,again the no shut interupt goes neither gets succesfully completed, easily observed in console debug. If Interface is already shut down and then u do then its fine no problems as link is properly down already just giving the no shut interupt to IOS makes it up. Deepak N wrote: Hi Monu I tried the configuration given by you. But i didnt find any problem in bringing up the interface when i cut and paste the configuration. Here is the config when i cut n paste the config from a text file yourname(config)#interface Serial1/1 yourname(config-if)#shut yourname(config-if)#encapsulation frame-relay yourname(config-if)#frame-relay lmi-type cisco yourname(config-if)#no shut yourname(config-if)#exit yourname(config)#interface Serial1/1.1 point-to-point yourname(config-subif)#no shutdown yourname(config-subif)#ip address 20.20.20.11 255.255.255.0 yourname(config-subif)#frame-relay interface-dlci 108 yourname(config-fr-dlci)#exit yourname(config-subif)# yourname(config-subif)# *Mar 1 00:48:19.271: %LINK-3-UPDOWN: Interface Serial1/1, changed state to up yourname(config-subif)# yourname(config-subif)# yourname(config-subif)# yourname(config-subif)#^Z yourname# yourname# *Mar 1 00:48:28.811: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by console yourname# yourname#sh ip int brief *Mar 1 00:48:30.271: %LINEPROTO-5-UPDOWN: Line protocol on Interface Serial1/1, changed state to up Interface IP-Address OK? Method StatusProt ocol FastEthernet0/0172.20.110.8YES manual upup FastEthernet0/1unassigned YES unset updown ATM0/0 unassigned YES unset upup ATM0/1 unassigned YES unset upup Serial1/0 unassigned YES unset down down Serial1/0.1unassigned YES manual deleted down Serial1/1 unassigned YES unset upup Serial1/1.120.20.20.11 YES manual upup Serial1/2 unassigned YES unset down down FastEthernet1/0unassigned YES unset updown FastEthernet1/1unassigned YES unset updown yourname# Please let me know ur comments Regards Deepak Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: There's obviously no good answer to why there are no problems bringing the link up/up when you type in the commands one by one but there are problems when you copy and paste them. Here are some suggestions, though: 1) You work for Cisco. Report it as a bug. 2) The copy and paste is corrupting a character, forgetting to do carriage return or something of that nature. Do all the commands end up the in the running config? 3) There's some sort of timing issue. To fix the problem: Don't do copy and paste that fast. :-) Priscilla Monu Sekhon wrote: Hi Mark, Thanx for reply.but I mentioned that when we do shut no shut again link comes up.no dlci, no lmi problem: I am testing in lab setup two rouetrs connnected to frame-relay cloud Please do help anybody in this regard, why the link doesnot come at one instant why it requiers again shut and no shut, when i copy paste the config and when i give command by command then without gving shut and noshut the link comes up. Mark W. Odette II wrote: in show ip interface it shows as protocol down , physical link up. sh frame-relay pvs shows as inactive.no lmi are exchanged. Usually Protocol Down, Link Up indicates that you have mismatched encapsulation, LMI-Type, or even incorrect IP Addressing (wrong Subnet or incorrect Subnet Mask) between your end and the other end of the FR Network. If no LMI is exchanged, then the LMI-Type is incorrect between that Serial Interface and the Service Provider Frame Switch. If this is a Frame Relay LAB setup, double-check your Frame Relay Switch configuration. If this is a Production Setup, contact your
RE: some question about frame-relay configuration! [7:63973]
Hi , DTE end commands on the end routers r1 and r3 has no effect whhether u give or not so not at all problem . yes they dont appear in running-config thats true as by default is dte device(routers) another thing as others suspect it could be wrong cable problem(probably DTE and DCE end) . try running hdlc and check Daniel Cotts wrote: DTE/DCE has meaning at Layer 2 Frame Relay where DCE refers to the Frame Switch. DTE/DCE also has meaning at Layer 1 where we determine which end provides clocking to the line. They are two seperate configuration points. At layer one the DCE end could be the switch or the router. If you are using a back-to-back serial cable, issue a show controllers s 0 (or whatever your serial interface is named) (put a space between the word serial and the number). The output should tell you whether you have the DCE or DTE end of the cable. Configure a clock rate on the DCE end. -Original Message- From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 11:56 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: some question about frame-relay configuration! [7:63973] The Long and Winding Road wrote: the frame-relay intf-type command is used on a frame relay switch, as part of the switch to switch config. it should not be used on a customer edge device. He set R1 and R3 to intf-type dte. That should work, shouldn't it? I tried it on my customer edge routers and it takes the command but doesn't put it in the config since it's the default. They are connected with serial xo cables to a router in the middle that has frame-relay switching and intf-type dce configured. In other words, the same config as this fellow's, although my routers don't leave the default config line in. I would say check the cables. Are you sure you really have the dte end at the dte router and the dce end at the dce router for both cables? On some routers show controler will tell you. Priscilla if you were to enter the frame-relay switching commands on R1 and R3, the interfaces would come up and the routers would engage in frame-relay switch signaling. You probably want to remove the frame-relay intf-type commands from R1 and R3, making them customer edge devices, at which point they will communicate with R2 tigers zheng wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] I have a question about frame-relay!Please tell me why it happened? the topolofy :r1(s0)---(s0/0)r2(s0/1)---(s0/0)r3 r1:2511,r2:2620,r3:2621 the configuration: r1: interface s0 ip address 10.10.10.1 255.255.255.0 encapsulation frame-relay frame-relay lmi-type ansi frame-relay intf-type dte frame-relay interface-dlci 100 ! r3: interface s0/0 ip address 10.10.10.2 255.255.255.0 encapsulation frame-relay frame-relay lmi-type ansi frame-relay intf-type dte frame-relay interface-dlci 101 ! r2: frame-relay switching int s0/0 no ip address encapsulation frame-relay clockrate 64000 frame-relay route 100 interface s0/1 101 frame-relay lmi-type ansi frame-relay intf-type dce ! int s0/1 no ip address encapsulation frame-relay clockrate 128000 frame-relay route 101 interface s0/0 100 frame-relay lmi-type ansi frame-relay intf-type dce ! But the serial of all of the router is shutdown,line protocol is also down! I want to know what happen! Thanks very much! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=64028t=63973 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Frame-Relay issue [7:63446]
Hi Mark, Thanx for reply.but I mentioned that when we do shut no shut again link comes up.no dlci, no lmi problem: I am testing in lab setup two rouetrs connnected to frame-relay cloud Please do help anybody in this regard, why the link doesnot come at one instant why it requiers again shut and no shut, when i copy paste the config and when i give command by command then without gving shut and noshut the link comes up. Mark W. Odette II wrote: in show ip interface it shows as protocol down , physical link up. sh frame-relay pvs shows as inactive.no lmi are exchanged. Usually Protocol Down, Link Up indicates that you have mismatched encapsulation, LMI-Type, or even incorrect IP Addressing (wrong Subnet or incorrect Subnet Mask) between your end and the other end of the FR Network. If no LMI is exchanged, then the LMI-Type is incorrect between that Serial Interface and the Service Provider Frame Switch. If this is a Frame Relay LAB setup, double-check your Frame Relay Switch configuration. If this is a Production Setup, contact your ISP and verify your Frame Relay configuration parameters. (LMI-Type, DLCI, etc.) On the No Shut command, I'd use it last on each interface you configure. -Mark -Original Message- From: Monu Sekhon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 7:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Frame-Relay issue [7:63446] Hi Larry/John, I forgot to mention no shut in the above confif while writing here, Its still there and connection does not come out See I mentioned that while giving command by command manually connection comes out. It seems to me that while the interface is down during that frame-relay LMIs think that interface is down and make the link down. I am rather confused.I dont know but this is happening. again writing config: -- interface Serial0 shut (if i give here no shut then link comes up at one go) encapsulation frame-relay frame-relay lmi-type cisco no shut exit interface Serial0/0.1 point-to-point no shutdown ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 frame-relay interface-dlci 108 exit and also John try these in your router but at one go the interface will not come up as far i know .I agree with ur confguration and mine is also correct .Its said by Prisicilla and others that shutting a interface is good practise while configuring encap types.This i read in one of the previous Posts. so can u all reply what is the problem here in show ip interface it shows as protocol down , physical link up. sh frame-relay pvs shows as inactive.no lmi are exchanged. any help will be appreciated. - Larry Letterman wrote: enter the no shut command into your cut and paste script for the Int Ser0 and it will come up..all interfaces in a router are always defaulted to shutdown..In your case the Main interface needs to be no shut in order for the logical interface to work... -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Monu Sekhon wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Hi All Hey I am facing a strange problem in frame-relay My config -- my initial config int serial 0 (nothing confgured initially) Then I cut paste this config and my link does not come up means Interface does not come up. interface Serial0 shut (if i give here no shut then link comes up at one go) encapsulation frame-relay frame-relay lmi-type cisco exit interface Serial0/0.1 point-to-point no shutdown ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 frame-relay interface-dlci 108 exit I have to do shut and no shut on main interface why ? if the above commands i execute one by one then the link comes up. Is it a differnece between pasting the config at one go or what when i give command single by single. I enable debugging for frame-relay packets and it shows encap faiiled once only on the above sub interface.is anything frame-relay lmis has anything to do. I am very confused. Thanx in advance [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=63495t=63446 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Frame-Relay issue [7:63446]
Hi All Hey I am facing a strange problem in frame-relay My config -- my initial config int serial 0 (nothing confgured initially) Then I cut paste this config and my link does not come up means Interface does not come up. interface Serial0 shut (if i give here no shut then link comes up at one go) encapsulation frame-relay frame-relay lmi-type cisco exit interface Serial0/0.1 point-to-point no shutdown ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 frame-relay interface-dlci 108 exit I have to do shut and no shut on main interface why ? if the above commands i execute one by one then the link comes up. Is it a differnece between pasting the config at one go or what when i give command single by single. I enable debugging for frame-relay packets and it shows encap faiiled once only on the above sub interface.is anything frame-relay lmis has anything to do. I am very confused. Thanx in advance Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=63446t=63446 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Frame-Relay issue [7:63446]
Hi Larry/John, I forgot to mention no shut in the above confif while writing here, Its still there and connection does not come out See I mentioned that while giving command by command manually connection comes out. It seems to me that while the interface is down during that frame-relay LMIs think that interface is down and make the link down. I am rather confused.I dont know but this is happening. again writing config: -- interface Serial0 shut (if i give here no shut then link comes up at one go) encapsulation frame-relay frame-relay lmi-type cisco no shut exit interface Serial0/0.1 point-to-point no shutdown ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 frame-relay interface-dlci 108 exit and also John try these in your router but at one go the interface will not come up as far i know .I agree with ur confguration and mine is also correct .Its said by Prisicilla and others that shutting a interface is good practise while configuring encap types.This i read in one of the previous Posts. so can u all reply what is the problem here in show ip interface it shows as protocol down , physical link up. sh frame-relay pvs shows as inactive.no lmi are exchanged. any help will be appreciated. - Larry Letterman wrote: enter the no shut command into your cut and paste script for the Int Ser0 and it will come up..all interfaces in a router are always defaulted to shutdown..In your case the Main interface needs to be no shut in order for the logical interface to work... -- Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Monu Sekhon wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Hi All Hey I am facing a strange problem in frame-relay My config -- my initial config int serial 0 (nothing confgured initially) Then I cut paste this config and my link does not come up means Interface does not come up. interface Serial0 shut (if i give here no shut then link comes up at one go) encapsulation frame-relay frame-relay lmi-type cisco exit interface Serial0/0.1 point-to-point no shutdown ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 frame-relay interface-dlci 108 exit I have to do shut and no shut on main interface why ? if the above commands i execute one by one then the link comes up. Is it a differnece between pasting the config at one go or what when i give command single by single. I enable debugging for frame-relay packets and it shows encap faiiled once only on the above sub interface.is anything frame-relay lmis has anything to do. I am very confused. Thanx in advance [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=63459t=63446 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Effect of Multipoint config on point-to-point [7:63460]
Hi Again , A new small query on frame-relay itself. Is the config below valid and can it be used having both Multipoint on main interface and poin-to-point sub interface simutaneusly. int serial 0 encap frame-relay ip address frame-relay interface-dlci 16 int serial 0/0.2 multi ip address frame-relay map 17 Does such conguration can work or the Muti access config on main interface will afffect the sub interfaces connections also. What implications the above design has or all 3 connections can be made to work any help will be appreciated. Thanx in advance Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=63460t=63460 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: \31 Mak could it be used on leased lines(seria [7:62853]
Thanx Kaj Logan I have gne through document . thanx for the information. My doubts are cleared:-) Kaj J. Niemi wrote: In mail.net.groupstudy.pro, you wrote: -will the connection work , till now i only know that 30 is the max mask used on serial lines .how will we use this 31 mask It will. Here's an example: RtrA int se0/0 ip add 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.254 RtrB int se0/1 ip add 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.254 - Does this applies only in ios version 12.2 or later as mentioned. Or a late-stage 12.0S. - Do people use these 31 mask Yes, they work well. - Can anybody provide me any inf link Check out RFC 3021, Using 31-Bit Prefixes on IPv4 Point-to-Point Links. // kaj Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62882t=62853 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Simple Ip issue (need help) [7:62728]
Thanx all for giving information But I would like to clarify that I was pinging remote side and I was able too and i checked debugs also on both side. IP Packets are going successfully through the link. But why IOS doesnoyt give error , dont know the reason for that. anyway thanx I think nothing more input anybody can give so closing this issue.If still anbody wants to share some idea can do so . Thanx once again. Peter van Oene wrote: At 01:20 AM 2/11/2003 +, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: No problem with the splitting of hairs. :-) I have been wondering why Cisco lets you do what the original poster is doing, which most of us misunderstood. He is using the same IP address on 2 serial interfaces on the SAME router. Sonet APS comes to mind? I usually use a /29 with 4 addresses, but you could use the same address. If you try to use the same IP address on two Ethernet interfaces, you just get an error when you try to configure the second Ethernet interface. I can't think of a practical use for this myself. With two serial interfaces, you don't get an error. Is this just an oversight? There are many such oversights in Cisco IOS. :-) Or maybe there is a real reason to do it. The more I think about it (over the last two paragraphs of your msg) the more APS seems the likely candidate. If you couldn't, this would be restrictive in some cases. Of course I'm thinking APS capable interfaces. I said in my original message that there's no ARP on serial interfaces so the router can't easily figure out if anyone else is using its address like it does on Ethernet. On Ethernet the router can send an ARP to see if someone else replies. But that's someone else on the LAN connected to the interface, not another interface on the same router. So, if it gives you an error on Ethernet when you use an address you have already used on another Ethernet interface, why doesn't it give you an error for serial interfaces? Maybe there's an actual technical reason, although probably it's just an oversight. By the way, it lets you configure an Ethernet interface to use an address already in use on a serial interface, but if you try to do it in the other order then you get an error. That's probably just another oversight. Would agree here. Might be something to do with internal mechanisms to map macs to IPs. Ie, if an interface is added, check the mac/ip binding list for duplicates and error if there is one. Such a mechanism wouldn't be relevant in SONET and for the APS reasoning, it may be expected that some interfaces share the same address. Cisco has always given you enough rope to hang yourself. Decent error messages have never been any more important than ease-of-use. :-) Priscilla Peter van Oene wrote: At 06:18 PM 2/10/2003 +, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: You can't have duplicate IP addresses anywhere. They have to be unique. The only exceptions would be if you were doing some sort of NAT or tunneling or something and the duplicates were hidden from each other. You don't get an error when you try to configure it because it's a lot harder for IOS to detect this on a serial interface than on an Ethernet interface. On Ethernet, a Cisco router ARPs for the address you give it. If it receives a reply, then it gives you an error and won't let you use the address. There's no ARP in serial land. You think you're pinging successfully, but how do you know who is really replying? Even if you could assign duplicate IP addresses, you shouldn't. You would wreak havoc with all sorts of things. There's no reason to do it either. If you're concerned with running out of addresses, just use private address. The 10.0.0.0 network has 16 million possibilities. For what it's worth, duplicating the same IP across a set of DNS servers in the same AS can provide an interesting spin on resiliency. So long as you configure unique IP's for normal communication. This sort of thing works good for protocols that are stateless (UDP DNS) Anycast-RP in PIM networks also uses the same IP on multiple boxes :-) Someone had to get blunt here! :-) Someone had to split some hair ! ___ Priscilla Oppenheimer www.troubleshootingnetworks.com www.priscilla.com Ladrach, Daniel E. wrote: If you ping you are probably pinging the Local IP.Try debug ip icmp to verify what you are pinging. Daniel Ladrach CCNP, CCNA WorldCom -Original Message- From: Monu Sekhon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 12:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Simple Ip issue (need help) [7:62728] Hi All, Thanx again for all for contribution confusion
\31 Mak could it be used on leased lines(serial) [7:62853]
Hi Harold/all, In your description u mentioned that u can use /31 mask also, Your comments: Since the point-to-point link is likely to have a /30 (or /31 if they're running 12.2) mask on it questions is - -will the connection work , till now i only know that 30 is the max mask used on serial lines .how will we use this 31 mask - Does this applies only in ios version 12.2 or later as mentioned. - Do people use these 31 mask - Can anybody provide me any inf link Thanx in Advance (Please refer the description below in thread he mentioned that.) Over a leased line I can't see the harm in leaving it running. If someone manages to get into your router, there's very little target enumeration they can do with CDP that can't be done by other means. Since the point-to-point link is likely to have a /30 (or /31 if they're running 12.2) mask on it, it's not going to be a stretch to figure out the other router's IP. While disabling CDP is certainly a sound practice on LAN interfaces, we also disable it on our switched WAN connections on general principles. That isn't a magic bullet by any means though, disabling CDP is security through obscurity more than anything else. If you're concerned about unauthorized access to your routers, then you should consider running access classes on your vty lines and AAA so you can audit access to the routers, if you aren't already. -Original Message- From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 1:12 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Why disable cdp for back-to-back serial connec [7:62798] Lawrence Law wrote: Dear Priscilla, Thank you for your clear explaination. May be it is better to disable cdp for low speed link, and security issue. CDP uses very little bandwidth, so unless it's a really low-speed link, I wouldn't turn it off for that reason. Regarding security, if it's a private point-to-point HDLC link, then security probably isn't too much of an issue. It would be hard for a hacker to see the packets. On the other hand, if the hacker somehow got into a router that was running CDP on any of its interfaces, then the hacker could learn about one or more additional routers, and that's not good. You want to limit how much a hacker can learn. It's sort of a close call since CDP is so helpful for troubleshooting, though. How about the rest of you out there? Do you disable CDP like some security documents say to do? If often occurs to me these days that we spent the '80s and '90s developing all sorts of cool protocols to share info of all sorts, and were spending the '00s disabling most of them for security reasons. It's a crazy world we live in. Priscilla Regards, Lawrence Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Cisco Discovery Protocol (CDP) is a managment protocol that allows routers and switches to tell each other about their IOS version, hardware platform, and basic config info. Some security experts say to disable it because it tells too much. It has nothing to do with bringing the serial interface up/up. You could use it or you could not. The two routers on the HDLC link don't have to agree. One could send CDP while the other doesn't and the link should still come up/up, assuming everything is OK at the physical and data-link layers. It's too bad they used no cdp enable in that simple example with no explanation. I don't think it's the default? So someone had to type it in, so they should have explained it. Priscilla Lawrence Law wrote: Dear all, From cisco configuration example http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk713/tk317/technologies_confi guration_examp le09186a00800944ff.shtml I'm wondering that the line no cdp enable is required for both router in order to make a serial connection up for back-to-back connection. Regards, Lawrence Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62853t=62853 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Simple Ip issue (need help) [7:62728]
Thanx, for instant reply. I am referring to have same ip on the serial interfaces of client router. Again I will show u my topolgy client-routerserver-router(isp) 2serial intf 2 serial intf serial 0 -ip add- 1.1.1.1 serial 0 ip add- 1.1.1.2 serial 1 -ip add- 1.1.1.1 serial 1 ip add- 1.1.1.2 I am using here duplicate ips on serial interfaces, is this connection correct or what design issues this has. We can use dulicate ip on serial with themselves but not duplicate with ethernet or loopback why ? any reason. -- Mark Tinka wrote: i am not sure i understand your question, but from what u are saying, u want your central and client router to have the same IP address on their serial interfaces... why would u want that.. just having the IP address in the same subnet should do e.g 1.1.1.0/30 ... anyway, i think u may have a routing issue.. since 1.1.1.1/24 is directly connected on both routers, how would u tell the local router that 1.1.1.1/24 is on the other [destination router] side of the serial link, yet it knows its a local address...?.. please provide more information for the solution u need, and we can help work with something more scalable.. good luck.. - Hi All, I have very simple question, Can we use duplicate ips on serial interfaces among them seleves although we cannot use duplicate ip on serial with Ethernet(lan interface) or loopback interface. My topology is like this Client router server router(connected back to back) 2 interfaces 2 inetrfaces these routers connected back to back configuration int serial 0/0 encap hdlc ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 int serial 0/1 ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 encap hdlc now if all the two interfaces of serial even if given duplicate ip among themselves works fine. no error from cli .interfaces are up and i am able to ping remote side. The ques is that 1) Lan interface also was in different subnet but serial interface doesnot accept that ips as duplicate or of loopback 2)What Implication such have on my design ,any limitation it has Does this type of design can be used, This is small thing is confusing me about ip. Thanx in advance Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62733t=62728 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Simple Ip issue (need help) [7:62728]
Hi All, Thanx again for all for contribution confusion still there , I am pinging remote side and I am able too. any comments from all(still confused with answers) Walker, James - Is wrote: Only problem is which side are you pinging -Original Message- From: John Murphy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 11:15 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Simple Ip issue (need help) [7:62728] If you're asking what I think you're asking, then I think your answer is yes, but you won't be able to pass any traffic across the circuit. Unless you've confused me (it doesn't seem I would be the only one), then the answer might not be the same. - Original Message - From: Monu Sekhon To: Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 12:13 AM Subject: Simple Ip issue (need help) [7:62728] Hi All, I have very simple question, Can we use duplicate ips on serial interfaces among them seleves although we cannot use duplicate ip on serial with Ethernet(lan interface) or loopback interface. My topology is like this Client router server router(connected back to back) 2 interfaces 2 inetrfaces these routers connected back to back configuration int serial 0/0 encap hdlc ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 int serial 0/1 ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 encap hdlc now if all the two interfaces of serial even if given duplicate ip among themselves works fine. no error from cli .interfaces are up and i am able to ping remote side. The ques is that 1) Lan interface also was in different subnet but serial interface doesnot accept that ips as duplicate or of loopback 2)What Implication such have on my design ,any limitation it has Does this type of design can be used, This is small thing is confusing me about ip. Thanx in advance Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62762t=62728 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Simple Ip issue (need help) [7:62728]
Hi All, I have very simple question, Can we use duplicate ips on serial interfaces among them seleves although we cannot use duplicate ip on serial with Ethernet(lan interface) or loopback interface. My topology is like this Client router server router(connected back to back) 2 interfaces 2 inetrfaces these routers connected back to back configuration int serial 0/0 encap hdlc ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 int serial 0/1 ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 encap hdlc now if all the two interfaces of serial even if given duplicate ip among themselves works fine. no error from cli .interfaces are up and i am able to ping remote side. The ques is that 1) Lan interface also was in different subnet but serial interface doesnot accept that ips as duplicate or of loopback 2)What Implication such have on my design ,any limitation it has Does this type of design can be used, This is small thing is confusing me about ip. Thanx in advance Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62728t=62728 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
