Hi Howard, If your configuration is all here then you need a static route in B router pointing to C.
Regards, ./diogo -montagner On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Howard Leadmon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I can't believe this one isn't working, I am sure I am looking over > something stupid. I needed to mux up 3x T1's between a location. > > > Information is as follows: (relevant bits) > > Location-A: Cisco 1720 > ! > interface Serial0 > description To Location-B > ip address 38.103.8.238 255.255.255.252 > ! > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 38.103.8.237 > ! > > > > > Location-B: Cat5500 RSM > ! > interface Multilink1 > description T1 MultiLink PPP Bundle to Location-C > ip address 192.168.98.29 255.255.255.252 > ppp multilink > multilink-group 1 > ! > interface Serial1/2:1 > description To Location-A > ip address 38.103.8.237 255.255.255.252 > ! > interface Serial1/5:1 > description T1 3 of 3 (MultiLink) > no ip address > encapsulation ppp > ppp multilink > multilink-group 1 > ! > interface Serial1/6:1 > description T1 2 of 3 (MultiLink) > no ip address > encapsulation ppp > ppp multilink > multilink-group 1 > ! > interface Serial1/7:1 > description T1 1 of 3 (MultiLink) > no ip address > encapsulation ppp > no fair-queue > ppp multilink > multilink-group 1 > ! > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 to global internet gateway! > > > > Location-C: Cisco 6509 Sup2 w/FlexWan > ! > interface Multilink1 > description T1 Bundle to Corporate > ip address 192.168.98.30 255.255.255.252 > ppp multilink > multilink-group 1 > ! > interface Serial3/0/0:0 > description T1 1 of 3 no ip address > encapsulation ppp > no fair-queue > ppp multilink > multilink-group 1 > ! > interface Serial3/0/1:0 > description T1 2 of 3 > no ip address > encapsulation ppp > ppp multilink > multilink-group 1 > ! > interface Serial3/0/2:0 > description T1 3 of 3 > no ip address > encapsulation ppp > ppp multilink > multilink-group 1 > ! > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.98.29 > ! > > > > The interfaces are up and running, the multilink bundle looks good, and if I > ping or trace from A to B, or B to A life is good. If I try and go from B > to C or C to B, again life is good. If I try and go from A to the internet > via B, or from C via B to the internet all is good. So it looks like all is > working. > > Where I get bit, is if I try and go from A to C, or C to A. I can not ping, > and if I trace it dies on router B. So it looks like single hop is good, > and if I go to another location out off of B (other networks) all is good, > but if I try and cross any other internal interface on the router and cross > the MLPPP link it dies. > > I was just going to use CEF to handle the link with per-packet load sharing > with a dynamic routing protocol, but apparently the FlexWan controller > doesn't support it, or it barked about an unknown command. Anyway trying to > debunk this I stripped it back to the above, just static routes between > A-to-B-to-C, and still it will not route. This is part of a larger network, > and none of the other remote enpoints will cross that multilink line, and I > can't pin down why. > > I am open to any suggestions, as I rarely use MLPPP, and am sure I am > missing something, but damn I would think two simple hops with static routes > should just go. Thanks to any that can offer assistance on debunking this > one.. > > > P.S. - Yes I know I have some routable, and some unroutable IP's, but this > is all behind a firewall, and gateways out, I just haven't gotten them to > pull the old public IP's out, granted that shouldn't matter for an internal > (in essence) isolated network. > > > > --- > Howard Leadmon > > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
