From: Tony Olzak (aolzak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Nov 04 2000 - 02:28:21 GMT-3
Actually,
I originally did this config using serial links. When I typed in the configs
for the email I just used ethernet interfaces for the example. Before I
wrote the email I used serial interfaces for my testing and it worked
perfectly.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve McNutt" <lpd@jacksonville.net>
To: "Tony Olzak" <aolzak@buckeye-express.com>; "Chuck Larrieu"
<chuck@cl.cncdsl.com>; "Erick B." <erickbe@yahoo.com>; "Ccielab"
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 12:20 AM
Subject: RE: confusion on bridging
> Tony's sample config does not work on a serial link though. I bring it up
> not because I want to confuse the issue or be a mr. smartypants, but
because
> I think it's proabaly a good idea to understand that/how bridging behaves
> differently on serial links.
>
> To get bridging to work on a serial links, and still be able to use the
same
> test points on r1 and r2, both sides of the link will have to be put into
a
> bridge group and IRB will have to be used. Don't forget to add a bridge
1
> route IP command on R2.
>
> Lo0-[R1]-s0-------s0-[R2]-BVI1
> 2.2.2.2 1.1.1.1 1.1.1.2
>
> -steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> Tony Olzak
> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 9:11 PM
> To: Chuck Larrieu; Erick B.; Ccielab
> Subject: Re: confusion on bridging
>
>
> Chuck,
>
> The command "ip routing" is on by default and hidden from the
configuration.
> Take two routers and configure them with just ip addresses. Then place a
> loopback on R1. Place a default static route on R2 and ping the loopback
on
> R1. You will be able to ping successfully even though there are no routing
> protocols running on R1.
>
>
> Configs:
>
> R1
> interface loopback 0
> ip address 2.2.2.2
> !
> interface ethernet 0
> ip address 1.1.1.1 255.0.0.0
>
> R2
> interface ethernet 0
> ip address 1.1.1.2 255.0.0.0
>
> You actually need to turn off IP routing in global config or in a bridge
> command (IRB, etc.).
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chuck Larrieu" <chuck@cl.cncdsl.com>
> To: "Erick B." <erickbe@yahoo.com>; "Ccielab" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 6:15 PM
> Subject: RE: confusion on bridging
>
>
> > How will it route ip if there are no static routes defined, or no
routing
> > protocol enabled, with networks placed into that routing process?
> >
> > I believe the show ip route will yield a "routing table" consisting of
> > connected interfaces. Traffic will not "route" between devices. I.e
> > forwarding will not take place.
> >
> > Am I wrong again?
> >
> > Chuck
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> > Erick B.
> > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 2:49 PM
> > To: David T. Absalom
> > Cc: Ccielab
> > Subject: Re: confusion on bridging
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > It'll route IP and bridge everything else if you have
> > a IP address assigned to the interface and don't have
> > 'no ip routing' globally.
> >
> > --- "David T. Absalom" <dabsalom@lucent.com> wrote:
> > > I'm confused (nothing new...)
> > >
> > > If an interface is in a bridge group but has an ip
> > > address and the "no ip
> > > routing" statement has NOT been issued
> > > (additionally, no crb or irb), will
> > > it route or bridge. Is ip routing on by default
> > > when an ip address is added
> > > to an interface?
> >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:25:41 GMT-3