From: Mingzhou Nie (mnie@yahoo.com)
Date: Thu Sep 19 2002 - 14:22:53 GMT-3
beda,
post your config and "show dlsw peer" output.
Ming
--- beda jain <bpjain@cisco.com> wrote:
> i try dlsw lile in p-2-mp sub interface in one site and other side
> mail
> interface.
>
> I did not work. do you have working config.
>
> Thanks,
> Beda
>
> At 10:48 PM 9/17/2002 -0400, elping wrote:
> >dlsw direct will work on subinterface if it is passthru
> >done it many times..
> >
> >Elping
> >CCIE
> >
> >Mingzhou Nie wrote:
> >
> > > beda,
> > >
> > > dlsw direct will not work on any type of subinterfaces but main
> > > interface. dlsw lite will work on subinterfaces as well as main
> > > interface. With p-to-p interface, no "frame map llc2 <dlci>" is
> needed.
> > >
> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/archives/ccielab/200204/threads.html
> > > search on "DSLW direct encap --Peer disconnected"
> > >
> > > Ming
> > >
> > > --- beda jain <bpjain@cisco.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > does Dlsw lite work in frame-relay multipoint interface or not.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Beda
> > > >
> > > > At 10:17 AM 9/17/2002 -0700, Mingzhou Nie wrote:
> > > > >donny,
> > > > >
> > > > >this question has been asked several times in the past. I'm
> > > > resending
> > > > >my personal notes again.
> > > > >
> > > > >****
> > > > >- encapsulation: watch out direct encap and llc2(dlsw lite)
> encap.
> > > > both
> > > > >reference individual dlci, but the first one needs "pass-thru"
> > > > option
> > > > >at the end and map dlci to dlsw, vs. the latter one doesn't
> use
> > > > >"pass-thru" and map dlci to llc2. direct encap only works on
> main
> > > > >interface. and direct encap doesn't work with backup peer. you
> can
> > > > not
> > > > >configure ip address in "dlsw local-peer" statement.
> > > >
> >http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/pd/ibsw/ibdlsw/tech/dls3_rg.htm
> > > >
> > >
>
>http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/idg4/nd2007.htm#xtocid31
> > > >
> >http://www.groupstudy.com/archives/ccielab/200201/msg00583.html
> > > >
> >http://www.groupstudy.com/archives/ccielab/200111/msg00784.html
> > > >
> >http://www.groupstudy.com/archives/ccielab/200201/msg00945.html
> > > > >
> > > > >****
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >--- Chris Hugo <chrishugo@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Remote Peer stays the same with both.Just the map
> statements will
> > > > > > differ
> > > > > > frame-relay map LLC2 is "DLSW Lite" --Which has local
> > > > acknowledgment
> > > > > > frame-relay map DLSW is Direct Encapsulation--Which does
> not have
> > > > > > local acknowledgment
> > > > > > I'm sure others will add to the post. But here is some
> before I
> > > > sleep
> > > > > > :)
> > > > > > chris hugo
> > > > > > Donny MATEO wrote: Hi Group,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I need help to clarify what is the difference between these
> two
> > > > > > configs for DLSW direct
> > > > > > encapsulation :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface serial 0
> > > > > > int s0
> > > > > > frame-relay map llc2 131
> > > > > >
> > > > > > and
> > > > > >
> > > > > > dlsw remote-peer 0 frame-relay interface serial 0 131
> > > > > > int s0
> > > > > > frame-relay map dlsw 131
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Solie says to use the latter for a multipoint interface. I
> tried
> > > > the
> > > > > > latter, but the state seems to
> > > > > > stay at disconnect. If I add the statement frame-relay map
> llc2
> > > > 131,
> > > > > > then it would become connect.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any clue ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > tks.
> > > > > > Donny
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This message is for information purposes only and its
> content
> > > > > > should not be construed as an offer, or solicitation of an
> offer,
> > > > > > to buy or sell any banking or financial instruments or
> services
> > > > > > and no representation or warranty is given in respect of
> its
> > > > > > accuracy, completeness or fairness. The material is subject
> > > > > > to change without notice. You should take your own
> independent
> > > > > > tax, legal and other professional advice in respect of the
> > > > content
> > > > > > of this message. This message may contain confidential or
> > > > > > legally privileged material and may not be copied,
> redistributed
> > > > > > or published (in whole or in part) without our prior
> written
> > > > consent.
> > > > > > This email may have been intercepted, partially destroyed,
> > > > > > arrive late, incomplete or contain viruses and no liability
> is
> > > > > > accepted by any member of the Credit Agricole Indosuez
> group
> > > > > > as a result. If you are not the intended recipient of this
> > > > message,
> > > > > > please immediately notify the sender and delete this
> message
> > > > > > from your computer.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ---------------------------------
> > > > > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > > > > Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >__________________________________________________
> > > > >Do you Yahoo!?
> > > > >Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
> > > > >http://news.yahoo.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
> > > http://news.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Oct 07 2002 - 07:43:57 GMT-3