From: Erick B. (erickbe@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Feb 08 2002 - 07:22:25 GMT-3
Hi,
Putting the interface-dlci command on the interface
along with a map lets you configure settings for the
DLCIs themselves. ie: class-maps (traffic-shaping),
vofr commands, etc. I just did the same cfg as you and
applied a class-map to one DLCI and turned on
traffic-shaping and that DLCI has the correct bc, etc
set and other DLCIs using defaults.
This is my reasoning why it works this way now in
recent IOS versions, but there could be another "cisco
answer" why the change was made.
Anyone know the specific IOS release where this change
was made by chance?
Erick
--- Przemyslaw Karwasiecki <karwas@ifxcorp.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> I have received several messages offlist, asking me
> about
> specific order, how map and interface-dlci have been
> entered.
>
> The answer is:
>
> After reload, without having multipoint subinterface
> defined,
> I did:
>
> Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software
> IOS (tm) 2500 Software (C2500-JOS56I-L), Version
> 12.1(12a), RELEASE
> SOFTWARE (fc1)
> Copyright (c) 1986-2002 by cisco Systems, Inc.
> Compiled Fri 18-Jan-02 08:54 by kellythw
> r1>en
> Password:
> r1#conf t
> Enter configuration commands, one per line. End
> with CNTL/Z.
> r1(config)#interface Serial0.1 multipoint
> r1(config-subif)# ip address 10.10.1.1 255.255.0.0
> r1(config-subif)# no ip split-horizon
> r1(config-subif)# frame-relay map ip 10.10.1.2 102
> r1(config-subif)# frame-relay map ip 10.10.1.3 103
> r1(config-subif)# frame-relay map ip 10.10.1.5 105
> r1(config-subif)#^Z
> r1#
> 00:06:28: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console
> by console
> r1#sh fram map
> Serial0.1 (up): ip 10.10.1.2 dlci 102(0x66,0x1860),
> static,
> CISCO, status defined, active
> Serial0.1 (up): ip 10.10.1.3 dlci 103(0x67,0x1870),
> static,
> CISCO, status defined, active
> Serial0.1 (up): ip 10.10.1.5 dlci 105(0x69,0x1890),
> static,
> CISCO, status defined, active
> r1#conf t
> Enter configuration commands, one per line. End
> with CNTL/Z.
> r1(config)#interface Serial0.1 multipoint
> r1(config-subif)# frame-relay interface-dlci 102
> r1(config-fr-dlci)# frame-relay interface-dlci 103
> r1(config-fr-dlci)# frame-relay interface-dlci 105
> r1(config-fr-dlci)#^Z
> r1#
> 00:07:47: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console
> by console
> r1#sh run int s0.1
> Building configuration...
>
> Current configuration : 291 bytes
> !
> interface Serial0.1 multipoint
> ip address 10.10.1.1 255.255.0.0
> no ip split-horizon
> frame-relay map ip 10.10.1.2 102
> frame-relay map ip 10.10.1.3 103
> frame-relay map ip 10.10.1.5 105
> frame-relay interface-dlci 102
> frame-relay interface-dlci 103
> frame-relay interface-dlci 105
> end
>
> r1#sh fram map
> Serial0.1 (up): ip 10.10.1.2 dlci 102(0x66,0x1860),
> static,
> CISCO, status defined, active
> Serial0.1 (up): ip 10.10.1.3 dlci 103(0x67,0x1870),
> static,
> CISCO, status defined, active
> Serial0.1 (up): ip 10.10.1.5 dlci 105(0x69,0x1890),
> static,
> CISCO, status defined, active
> r1#
>
> ?????
>
> Przemek
>
> On Thu, 2002-02-07 at 18:16, Przemyslaw Karwasiecki
> wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > It looks like I am beating dead horse, but I
> failed my first
> > attempt because of FR L3->L2 maping, so I really
> need to understand it.
> >
> > At Caslow book, page 135, there is a following
> paragraph:
> > "If you have a number of Frame-Relay map
> statements on a physical
> > interface or on a multipoint subinterface and you
> type a Frame-Relay
> > interace-DLCI statement referencing the same DLCI
> that the map
> > statements were referencing, all of the map
> statements will be erased."
> >
> > Now, please take a look:
> > r1#sh run int s 0.1
> > Building configuration...
> >
> > Current configuration : 291 bytes
> > !
> > interface Serial0.1 multipoint
> > ip address 10.10.1.1 255.255.0.0
> > no ip split-horizon
> > frame-relay map ip 10.10.1.2 102
> > frame-relay map ip 10.10.1.3 103
> > frame-relay map ip 10.10.1.5 105
> > frame-relay interface-dlci 102
> > frame-relay interface-dlci 103
> > frame-relay interface-dlci 105
> > end
> >
> > r1#
> >
> > What should I think about it?
> >
> > Thanks for your comments,
> >
> > Przemek
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 20 2002 - 13:46:15 GMT-3