From: Tony Olzak (aolzak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Nov 04 2000 - 03:40:41 GMT-3
Chuck,
I was just answering your question as to how routing occurs without any
routing protocols running.
In order for your scenario to work, just use IRB. Even though you are
bridging IP at the physical interface, you can route IP using the BVI.
For those about to flame, note I said physical interface and not physical
layer.
Tony
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chuck Larrieu" <chuck@cl.cncdsl.com>
To: "Steve McNutt" <lpd@jacksonville.net>; "Tony Olzak"
<aolzak@buckeye-express.com>; "Erick B." <erickbe@yahoo.com>; "Ccielab"
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 1:23 AM
Subject: RE: confusion on bridging
> As long as we are beating dead horses here, I have fooled around a bit on
my
> routers, with poor results. I believe, though, we are all operating under
a
> false premise.
>
> Without hosts off the ethernet interface, and without the ethernet
interface
> being part of a bridge group, this router to router to router stuff will
> appear as though it doesn't work.
>
> When configuring the router using the bridge x protocol y, you are turning
> the router into a plain old layer two device. I don't believe that things
> like ping will work from router to router. At least in my case, I put ip
> addresses on the ethernet interfaces ( no keep also ) and added the e0's
to
> the bridge group. But I can't ping from interface to interface. I suspect,
> though, that if I were to have those interfaces plugged into hubs, and had
> real hosts on those segments, I would see results.
>
> Anyone?
>
> Chuck
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Steve McNutt
> Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 9:38 PM
> To: Tony Olzak; Chuck Larrieu; Erick B.; Ccielab
> Subject: RE: confusion on bridging
>
> Hmm, tried your exact config with serial links and got no joy. Tried it
with
> HDLC and PPP. I never have been able to get bridging to work on serial
> links without using bridge groups, always thought it was a traffic
> mapping/encapsulation thing. there's not much to the config, don't see
what
> I could have done differently.
>
> I have to say I'm quite puzzled. Sure would like to have a dump of your
> working configs so I can paste them into my routers.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Olzak [mailto:aolzak@buckeye-express.com]
> Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2000 12:28 AM
> To: Steve McNutt; Chuck Larrieu; Erick B.; Ccielab
> Subject: Re: confusion on bridging
>
>
> 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