Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: (ASCEND) Multiple MAX 4004's ver 5.0ap1, Stack, Rip V2, to OSPF network?
John,
I think my original message got lost so...here it is again.
This looks like it works for static SINGLE IP address users. But if I
have P75's with IP addresses of 129.4.140.1/29 and the MAXen are
129.4.247.251/28 and 129.4.247.252/28, then would this scenario still
work?
How about this?:
XXXXXX Password = "YYYY"
User-Service = Framed-User,
Framed-Protocol = PPP,
Ascend-Route-IP = Route-IP-Yes,
Framed-Address = 129.4.140.1,
Framed-Netmask = 255.255.255.248,
Framed-Route = "129.4.247.251/28 129.4.140.1 1",
Ascend-Idle-Limit = 64000
The first entry in the "Framed-Route" is confusing me. The manual says
it is the IP address of the host or subnet reached by this route. Is
this the entry for the particular MAXen, the Cisco router, or the
address of the incoming P75? In my example, I used it as the address of
the MAX, but I don't think this is correct. If the user dialed into the
other MAXen, this would not work?
Thanks
Kirk
-----Original Message-----
From: John Coy [SMTP:jcoy@arkansas.net]
Sent: Saturday, May 17, 1997 3:08 PM
To: Kirk Rogers
Subject: Re: (ASCEND) Multiple MAX 4004's ver 5.0ap1,
Stack, Rip V2, to OSPF network?
At 11:20 AM 5/17/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Like the subject says, has anyone attempted this configuration?
>
>I have (2) MAX 4004's and would like to make use of the
proclaimed
>"Stack" option with PRI lines terminating into both hubs, users
dialing
>a single number to gain access to either box, and the MAX's
looking like
>a single unit (MP across the chassis).
>
[snip]
>
>So...we do not want to enter static addresses into the Cisco's
and would
>like to implement the Stack option. Am I assuming correctly
that I must
>enable "Send-RipV2" in the MAX, RIPV2 in the Cisco, and the
Cisco would
>then be able to propagate the subnets to the rest of the
network (both
>host based routes from the single IP address community and 29
bit
>subnets from the PXX community)?
>
We do something similar (that is, propagate RIP v2 back to a
Cisco 7513). You can easily do this by turning on RIPv2 on your
MAXen (Both-v2) and using a RADIUS entry such as this:
XXXXXX Password = "UNIX"
User-Service = Framed-User,
Framed-Protocol = PPP,
Ascend-Route-IP = Route-IP-Yes,
Framed-Address = 208.133.30.26,
Framed-Netmask = 255.255.255.255,
Framed-Route = "208.146.100.192/27 208.133.30.26 1",
Ascend-Idle-Limit = 64000
In this example, user XXXXXX gets assigned the static address
of 208.133.30.26 (which is on the same subnet of the MAXen -
the MAXen are configured to proxy active connections). As soon
as the user connects, the route 208.146.100.192/27 gets created
and placed in the MAX routing table. This route entry is then
propagated to each MAX as well as to the Cisco.
In the Cisco, there is one static route pointing to the ethernet
Interface the MAXen are connected to (this is normal). I then
configured it to accept incoming routes via RipV2 as follows:
router rip
version 2
redistribute static
network 208.133.30.0
distribute-list 5 in FastEthernet5/1
access-list 5 permit 208.146.100.0 0.0.0.255
I use the access list because the MAXen want to send back RIP
entries for every modem connected (such as dial up PPP users)
which is unnecessary to propagate back to the Cisco.
Your Cisco is then responsible for propagating these routes
back to any OSPF neighbors.
The beauty of this implementation is that regardless of what MAX
the customer connects his route follows him w/out any problems.
Thus, stacking is only necessary if you have MPP customers who
come on the last channel of one MAX and the next available
channel
on another one. We use stacking only for this reason.
I hope that helps. If not, send me some email and I'll happily
explain it more.
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.shore.net/~dreaming/ascend-faq>
or <ftp://ftp.shore.net/members/dreaming/ascend-faq.txt>
Follow-Ups: