Re: ??Fw: need clarification: ip unnumbered in routing tables
At 02:15 PM 2/26/01, nobody wrote: Is the below a dumb question? No. Nobody replied. Can somebody enlighten me? ;-) p. - Original Message - From: "nobody" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 2:07 PM Subject: need clarification: ip unnumbered in routing tables just need to verify my thinking: example: serial line (PPP) connection between routers A and B using ip unnumbered. router A: e0=192.168.1.1/24 s0=192.168.3.1/24 Why does s0 have an address if it's unnumbered? routing table for A: c192.168.1.0/24is directly connected, ethernet0 r192.168.2.0/24[120/1] via 192.168.3.2, 00:00:05, serial0 s* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, serial0 router B: e0=192.168.2.1/24 s0=192.168.3.2/24 routing table B: r192.168.1.0/24[120/1] via 192.168.3.2, 00:00:06, serial0 c192.168.2.0/24is directly connected, ethernet0 s* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, serial0 i thought that the routing table should reflect the ethernet ip address of the remote router on local serial interface? It will reflect the next hop, unless it really is unnumbered, but it appears to be numbered. What am I missing? Priscilla i don't see it here. is it an error or is it me? thanx, p. _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Priscilla Oppenheimer http://www.priscilla.com _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ??Fw: need clarification: ip unnumbered in routing tables
Check out http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/701/20.html "Priscilla Oppenheimer" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... At 02:15 PM 2/26/01, nobody wrote: Is the below a dumb question? No. Nobody replied. Can somebody enlighten me? ;-) p. - Original Message - From: "nobody" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 2:07 PM Subject: need clarification: ip unnumbered in routing tables just need to verify my thinking: example: serial line (PPP) connection between routers A and B using ip unnumbered. router A: e0=192.168.1.1/24 s0=192.168.3.1/24 Why does s0 have an address if it's unnumbered? routing table for A: c192.168.1.0/24is directly connected, ethernet0 r192.168.2.0/24[120/1] via 192.168.3.2, 00:00:05, serial0 s* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, serial0 router B: e0=192.168.2.1/24 s0=192.168.3.2/24 routing table B: r192.168.1.0/24[120/1] via 192.168.3.2, 00:00:06, serial0 c192.168.2.0/24is directly connected, ethernet0 s* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, serial0 i thought that the routing table should reflect the ethernet ip address of the remote router on local serial interface? It will reflect the next hop, unless it really is unnumbered, but it appears to be numbered. What am I missing? Priscilla i don't see it here. is it an error or is it me? thanx, p. _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Priscilla Oppenheimer http://www.priscilla.com _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ??Fw: need clarification: ip unnumbered in routing tables
If you are using ip unnumbered,then there is no need to assign IP addresses to the serial interfaces of Routers A and B. You could do: RouterA#show run and check the listings that follows the serial 0/0. If there is an assigned IP address, then you have not correctly configured the ip unnumbered. Do the same for Router B. The purpose of using ip unnumbered is to conserve the IP addresses similar to what can the VLSM can do for the serial interfaces,i.e., assigning /30. e.g., s0/0 IP address: 192.168.3.1/30 The routing table of Router A shows that RIP routing protocol is used and the 192.168.2.0 network is advertised by Router B via 192.168.3.2 [120/1]. Cost is 1 (one hop away) and admin distance is 120. Hope I explained it correctly. Arthur From: nobody [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: nobody [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: ??Fw: need clarification: ip unnumbered in routing tables Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 14:15:29 -0800 Is the below a dumb question? Nobody replied. Can somebody enlighten me? ;-) p. - Original Message - From: "nobody" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 2:07 PM Subject: need clarification: ip unnumbered in routing tables just need to verify my thinking: example: serial line (PPP) connection between routers A and B using ip unnumbered. router A: e0=192.168.1.1/24 s0=192.168.3.1/24 routing table for A: c192.168.1.0/24is directly connected, ethernet0 r192.168.2.0/24[120/1] via 192.168.3.2, 00:00:05, serial0 s* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, serial0 router B: e0=192.168.2.1/24 s0=192.168.3.2/24 routing table B: r192.168.1.0/24[120/1] via 192.168.3.2, 00:00:06, serial0 c192.168.2.0/24is directly connected, ethernet0 s* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, serial0 i thought that the routing table should reflect the ethernet ip address of the remote router on local serial interface? i don't see it here. is it an error or is it me? thanx, p. _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ??Fw: need clarification: ip unnumbered in routing tables
Priscilla, just need to verify my thinking: example: serial line (PPP) connection between routers A and B using ip unnumbered. router A: e0=192.168.1.1/24 s0=192.168.3.1/24 Why does s0 have an address if it's unnumbered? Good catch. I did not even notice it ;-( Seems the authors of the BCRAN book (Thomas M. Thomas II and Adam Quiggle) either used the wrong picture with the output, or there is no link between the too and I am using my imagination. Both are good possibilities. They use the same IP addressing in both examples and the picture and the output are adjacent to each other (pg 152 and 153). I think my imagination is the problem. routing table for A: c192.168.1.0/24is directly connected, ethernet0 r192.168.2.0/24[120/1] via 192.168.3.2, 00:00:05, serial0 s* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, serial0 router B: e0=192.168.2.1/24 s0=192.168.3.2/24 routing table B: r192.168.1.0/24[120/1] via 192.168.3.2, 00:00:06, serial0 c192.168.2.0/24is directly connected, ethernet0 s* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, serial0 i thought that the routing table should reflect the ethernet ip address of the remote router on local serial interface? It will reflect the next hop, unless it really is unnumbered, but it appears to be numbered. What am I missing? Priscilla I hate when I don't see the obvious. I think you figured it out. Thank you. p. _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
need clarification: ip unnumbered in routing tables
just need to verify my thinking: example: serial line (PPP) connection between routers A and B using ip unnumbered. router A: e0=192.168.1.1/24 s0=192.168.3.1/24 routing table for A: c192.168.1.0/24is directly connected, ethernet0 r192.168.2.0/24[120/1] via 192.168.3.2, 00:00:05, serial0 s* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, serial0 router B: e0=192.168.2.1/24 s0=192.168.3.2/24 routing table B: r192.168.1.0/24[120/1] via 192.168.3.2, 00:00:06, serial0 c192.168.2.0/24is directly connected, ethernet0 s* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, serial0 i thought that the routing table should reflect the ethernet ip address of the remote router on local serial interface? i don't see it here. is it an error or is it me? thanx, p. _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
