Good idea, he'd be in connected route hell otherwise.
Bri
On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Dimitrije wrote:
> I recommended to my colleague to remap one of the redundant serial links to a
>different
> subnet. He made the change and all is well. Now all pings work and performance has
> notiicably improved. "Show ip route" command displays multiple RIP paths to
>destination
> networks. It looks like links are load balancing as they are suppose to.
>
> It looks like these routers were just misconfigured as I suspected. But I wanted to
> solicit your opinions just in case I was missing something that the original network
> designer intended, but that I wasn't aware of.
>
> Thanks all for your input.
> dj
>
>
> Brian wrote:
>
> > If you were doing IP unnumbered and wanted failover, perhaps that would be
> > one. Just a guess though, I would never try the serial links with
> > overlapping addresses like the ones that started this thread.
> >
> > Bri
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Erick B." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "Mask Of Zorro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2001 10:43 PM
> > Subject: Re: redundant serial links in same subnet??
> >
> > > I found some docs mentioning this and it does make
> > > sense for dial backup and related scenarios. I can't
> > > think of anything else offhand that it would be useful
> > > for. Perhaps thats why load balancing over it wasn't
> > > working well... with both interfaces up at same time
> > > on same router. I'll have to do some testing with
> > > this.
> > >
> > > --- Mask Of Zorro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Cisco allows up to 4 serial links in the same
> > > > subnet. There are situations
> > > > where you would want to do that, but I cannot for
> > > > the life of me recall what
> > > > they are... I did read about it once, and actually
> > > > had to research it with
> > > > the TAC. Search the TAC archives and you will find
> > > > the message from them
> > > > that indicates you cannot do the 5th link...
> > > >
> > > > Z
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >From: "Michael Snyder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > >Reply-To: "Michael Snyder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > >Subject: Re: redundant serial links in same
> > > > subnet??
> > > > >Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 11:50:19 -0800
> > > > >
> > > > >/24? Subnet them. I like /30 for p to p links.
> > > > run rip version 2.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >"Dimitrije" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > I colleague of mine has a network connecting two
> > > > routers with redundant
> > > > >serial
> > > > > > links. These serial links happen to reside in
> > > > the same subnet as
> > > > >follows:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Router
> > > > > > A
> > > > >Router
> > > > > > B
> > > > > > S0 - 192.1.67.1/24 -----------------------------
> > > > 192.1.67.201/24 - S0
> > > > > > S1 - 192.1.67.2/24 -----------------------------
> > > > 192.1.67.202/14 - S1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Both Routers are running RIP.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When both links are up, network is very sluggish
> > > > and ping works
> > > > >intermittently
> > > > > > (anywhere from 40%-70% of the time) between
> > > > Routers A & B. When either
> > > > >link is
> > > > > > shut down (only one link is up at a time), pings
> > > > work 100% of the time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm suspecting that having both serial links in
> > > > the same subnet is
> > > > >creating
> > > > > > problems. First of all, can you even do this?
> > > > Secondly, if you can put
> > > > >both
> > > > > > serial 0 & 1 in the same subnet, is this
> > > > creating a layer-2 bridge-loop
> > > > > > environment?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think that putting each serial link in a
> > > > separate sub-net should solve
> > > > >the
> > > > > > problem, but I don't have access to any
> > > > equipment to test this.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Am I correct or off-base?? Any definitive
> > > > feedback would be great. Any
> > > > >links
> > > > > > to spell out the issues with this scenario would
> > > > also be helpful.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > thanks,
> > > > > > dj
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
> > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
> > >
> > > _________________________________
> > > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> >
> > _________________________________
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
