From: George Spahl (georges@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Nov 01 2000 - 19:22:09 GMT-3
Just guessing, I didn't test it, but I don't think you should have that '1'
on the end of the "source-bridge spanning" command. I believe that might
be tying it to a non-existent bridge group.
George
At 09:05 PM 11/1/00 +0000, Jack Heney wrote:
>Oops....Yes it was a typo...RtrA has "bridge-group 1" and "bridge 1 protocol
>ieee".
>
>I noticed something else interesting....When I try to ping RtrA from HostA,
>I don't get the duplicate ring error message that I get when I ping from
>RtrA to HostA.
>
>Any ideas?
>
>
>
>>From: "Rogell, Dennis" <Dennis_Rogell@milgo.com>
>>To: 'Jack Heney' <jheneyccie@hotmail.com>
>>Subject: RE: SR/TLB
>>Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 16:04:18 -0500
>>
>>Jack
>>On rtra I did not see a bridge-group statement is that a typo
>>
>>Dennis Rogell
>>Email : dennis_rogell@milgocom
>>Phone: (954) 426-2581
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Jack Heney [SMTP:jheneyccie@hotmail.com]
>> > Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 12:35
>> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> > Subject: SR/TLB
>> >
>> > I'm having trouble getting SR/TLB to work...Here's my config:
>> >
>> > RtrA--------------RtrB---------------HostA
>> > ether token
>> >
>> > RtrA:
>> > interface fastethernet 0/0
>> > ip address 10.1.1.2 255.255.255.0
>> >
>> >
>> > RtrB:
>> > no ip routing
>> > source-bridge ring-group 3
>> > source-bridge transparent 3 4 11 1
>> > interface ethernet 0/0
>> > bridge-group 1
>> > interface tokenring 0/0
>> > source-bridge spanning 1
>> > source-bridge 2 12 3
>> > ring-speed 16
>> > bridge 1 protocol ieee
>> >
>> > HostA has an IP address of 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.0
>> >
>> > My understanding is that the above configuration should cause traffic on
>> > the
>> > Token RIng network to be bridged to ring 3 (virtual-ring), which then
>> > bridges it to pseudo-ring 4 (actually ethernet bridge-group 1).
>>However,
>> > pings do not seem to be able to cross the bridge.
>> >
>> > When I "debug source bridge" on RtrB and try to ping HostA from RtrA,
>>this
>> >
>> > is the output (I also included the output of "show source-bridge"):
>> >
>> > 00:03:06: VRING: forward explorer, bn 12 trn 2, [C810.004B.003C.0020]
>> > 00:03:06: VRING: forward pak (srn 3 bn 11 trn 2), src: 8010.4b95.56ce
>>dst:
>> >
>> > 0030.
>> > 8004.49e0, [0890.004B.003C.0020]
>> > 00:03:06: SRB0: explorer enqueued (srn 2 bn 12 trn 3)
>> > 00:03:06: SRB0: duplicate ring violation, s: 800c.0120.9207 d:
>> > ffff.ffff.ffff ri
>> > f: C810.004B.003C.0020
>> > 00:03:08: VRING: forward explorer, bn 12 trn 2, [C810.004B.003C.0020]
>> > 00:03:08: VRING: forward pak (srn 3 bn 11 trn 2), src: 8010.4b95.56ce
>>dst:
>> >
>> > 0030.
>> > 8004.49e0, [0890.004B.003C.0020]
>> > 00:03:08: SRB0: explorer enqueued (srn 2 bn 12 trn 3)
>> > 00:03:08: SRB0: duplicate ring violation, s: 800c.0120.9207 d:
>> > ffff.ffff.ffff ri
>> > f: C810.004B.003C.0020
>> > 00:03:10: VRING: forward explorer, bn 12 trn 2, [C810.004B.003C.0020]
>> > 00:03:10: VRING: forward pak (srn 3 bn 11 trn 2), src: 8010.4b95.56ce
>>dst:
>> >
>> > 0030.
>> > 8004.49e0, [0890.004B.003C.0020]
>> > 00:03:10: SRB0: explorer enqueued (srn 2 bn 12 trn 3)
>> > 00:03:10: SRB0: duplicate ring violation, s: 800c.0120.9207 d:
>> > ffff.ffff.ffff ri
>> > f: C810.004B.003C.0020
>> > 00:03:12: VRING: forward explorer, bn 12 trn 2, [C810.004B.003C.0020]
>> > 00:03:12: VRING: forward pak (srn 3 bn 11 trn 2), src: 8010.4b95.56ce
>>dst:
>> >
>> > 0030.
>> > 8004.49e0, [0890.004B.003C.0020]
>> > 00:03:12: SRB0: explorer enqueued (srn 2 bn 12 trn 3)
>> > 00:03:12: SRB0: duplicate ring violation, s: 800c.0120.9207 d:
>> > ffff.ffff.ffff ri
>> > f: C810.004B.003C.0020
>> > 00:03:14: VRING: forward explorer, bn 12 trn 2, [C810.004B.003C.0020]
>> > 00:03:14: VRING: forward pak (srn 3 bn 11 trn 2), src: 8010.4b95.56ce
>>dst:
>> >
>> > 0030.
>> > 8004.49e0, [0890.004B.003C.0020]
>> > 00:03:14: SRB0: explorer enqueued (srn 2 bn 12 trn 3)
>> > 00:03:14: SRB0: duplicate ring violation, s: 800c.0120.9207 d:
>> > ffff.ffff.ffff ri
>> > f: C810.004B.003C.0020
>> >
>> > RtrB#sh source-bridge
>> >
>> > Local Interfaces: receive transmit
>> > srn bn trn r p s n max hops cnt cnt
>> > drops
>> > To0/0 2 12 3 * f 7 7 7 5 7
>>5
>> >
>> > Global RSRB Parameters:
>> > TCP Queue Length maximum: 100
>> >
>> > Ring Group 3:
>> > No TCP peername set, TCP transport disabled
>> > Maximum output TCP queue length, per peer: 100
>> > Rings:
>> > bn: 12 rn: 2 local ma: 400b.5d1b.f681 TokenRing0/0 fwd: 0
>> > bn: 11 rn: 4 locvrt ma: 400b.5d1b.f601 Bridge-group 1 fwd: 5
>> >
>> > Explorers: ------- input ------- ------- output -------
>> > spanning all-rings total spanning all-rings total
>> > To0/0 0 0 0 7 0 7
>> >
>> > Explorer fastswitching enabled
>> > Local switched: 1 flushed 0 max Bps 38400
>> >
>> > rings inputs bursts throttles output drops
>> > To0/0 0 0 0 0
>> >
>> > It looks like the RtrB recognizes that Ring 3 (the virtual-ring) is
>> > attached
>> > to the actual token ring (2) via bridge 12 and attached to the
>>pseudo-ring
>> >
>> > (4) via bridge 11, which is what I anticipated. It also seems to be
>> > forwarding the pings from RtrA to ring 3, but not from ring 3 to ring 2:
>> > bn: 12 rn: 2 local ma: 400b.5d1b.f681 TokenRing0/0 fwd: 0
>> > bn: 11 rn: 4 locvrt ma: 400b.5d1b.f601 Bridge-group 1 fwd: 5
>> >
>> > I can't figure out what the "duplicate ring violation" is referring to,
>> > because I made sure that I used different ring numbers for the actual
>> > token
>> > ring, the pseudo-ring, and the virtual-ring, but I'm guessing this is
>> > somehow related to my lack of connectivity.
>> > Can anyone shed some light on this situation for me?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Jack
>> >
>> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:25:40 GMT-3