Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (ASCEND) 6.1.7 and randomness of the Max IP address....
At 22:29 23/08/98 -0500, Rob Myers wrote:
>I would guess it has something to do with OSPF and/or stacking. We use
>RADIUS to assign the route to the user and have both numbered and
>unnumbered routes connecting to us. Usually, customers using Pipelines
>are set up using unnumbered routes and people w/ Ciscos are given numbered
>routes. Then we have the modem and NAT users that are randomly assigned
>IPs.
>
>The IP address that the MAX broadcasts via traceroute (even if you
>traceroute to the max itself) is the one that we assign to our unnumbered
>Pipeline dial-in users.
>
>Here's a better explanation:
>
>Let's say the ethernet address of the MAX is 10.0.0.21. I assign Joe
>Pipeline User an IP range of 10.0.1.1/24. We tell RADIUS to give the MAX
>an IP address of 10.0.0.254/24 (i.e. "Ascend-PPP-Address = 10.0.0.254")
>since there's no telling which box he hits.
>
>Whenever I traceroute to Joe or anyone else for that matter the MAX
>reports its address as 10.0.0.254 (even if I report to the max).
Are you assigning the same address to multiple WAN interfaces? Or put
another way, are you assigning the same MAX interface to all unnumbered
connections?
There are (at least) three distinctions to what we are doing here:
1) we are doing either complete numbered (i.e. a /30) or not assigning a MAX
interface address at all.
2) we are not duplicating IP addresses on MAX WAN interfaces.
3) we are not assigning interface adresses via RADIUS.
Also, no OSPF or Stacking.
And, as I said, we cannot (yet ;-) see this problem/anomally.
>Hope that makes sense. :)
I think so ;-)
Regards,
Neale.
>
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
Follow-Ups: