> On Sat, 24 Jan 1998, Jason Hatch wrote:
>
> > In this example, all ethernet devices are on the same /24 network, shown
> > here as "A". All ComOS are version 3.7.2 and all portmasters (finally)
> > have 4 megs of ram, with exception of the IRX-114 which only has 1 meg of
> > ram (it has either 2 or 300k free on it).
>
> Bump it to 4 if you are considering ospf or bgp.
Must I really go to 4 if I'm not using BGP? I would think I would be able
to squeeze OSPF in and maybe even SNMP:
System memory 1048576 bytes - 731700 used, 316876 available
1152:0 640:0 80:5 176:0 32:0 128:2 16:96 256:1 48:1
System nbufs 1100 - 52 used, 1048 available
Besides, when it comes time to do BGP, I think I'll get a Cisco.
Livingston's are great for quick and easy routers for downstream
customers, but to think that all this time has passed (2 years I've had
it) and I can't even assign multiple IP's to the ethernet interface. Just
think, if I could do that, then I wouldn't be worrying about doing OSPF on
my tiny POP, I'd just config the interfaces on all my PM's to have an IP
on all my subnets and let proxy arp go to work for me.
> > Now, when we dial into portmaster 1, with a static IP of B.253, something
> > wierd happens. A traceroute from the Solaris box shows it going to the IRX
> > (it's default route), over to portmaster 3, then to portmaster 1, then to
> > its destination. Looking at the route tables of the IRX, we still see our
> > RIP route of B.0 pointing to portmaster 3. Going into portmaster 2, we see
> > the same route. But looking at portmaster 3, we see a RIP route pointing
> > B.0 to portmaster 1. It looks as if portmaster 1 selectivly sent a RIP
> > update to portmaster 3, but not the router and the other portmasters. This
> > explains how portmaster 3 knew to send it to portmaster 1.
>
> Maybe cuz the ip address used belonged to the OTHER portmaster first?
>
> > So what happens when someone dials into portmaster 2 with a B.252 static
> > IP with the B.1-30 assigned address pool on portmaster-3, and a user with
> > B.253 on portmaster 1. Will it break then? :-)
>
> Not unless you have the static route defined in the portmaster. I assume
> you are using radius and this will work as long as you are using a routing
> protocol so that the static IP gets routed to properly... BUT, you have
> PM # 3 in a separate subnet? Can a user with a static IP dial into 1, 2 or
> 3? You prolly shoudnt be doing that because you could be pulling an IP
> from one of the OTHER subnets.
Actually, it did break. I am using RADIUS and RIP. Consider this,
portmaster 3 has an IP address pool in subnet B. On boot, it sends a RIP
broadcast to all the Portmasters and the IRX that it has B.0 (when it
really just has B.1-30). A customer dials into portmaster 1 with a Static
address of B.253. This works, as Portmaster 1 sends a RIP announcement to
Portmaster 3 (but not the others) that it has B.0 now, so portmaster 3
will send everything that is not dialed in (even idle IPs from its pool)
to Portmaster 1. Now, I dial into Portmaster 2 with a Static IP of B.251
and that user can do NOTHING but ping Portmaster 2 _until_ about 30
seconds (time for next RIP announcement?) after the guy with B.253 on
Portmaster 1 _logs_off_.
Now, I know that RIP is bad to begin with, but what I don't understand is
why did portmaster 1 send a RIP announcement to portmaster 3 only saying
that it had B.0, which would cause IPs in B to be sent to Portmaster 3,
then 1 (the router and other PM's think B is on 3), but why didn't
portmaster 2 do the same, causing it to try 3, then 1 then 2?
-Jason
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.