Re: DLSw posted 01/10/2001
I have been thinking about it and there is one thing that comes to my mind.
If i define two bridge groups, put ether of Router2 in one bridge group and
ring 1 in bridge group 2 and then define two dlsw bgroup-lists, one
permitting bridge 1 and the other bridge 2 and map them to the remote peer
statements of the two other routers ... will this stop Router 3 from
communicating with the ether of Router 2 and the Ether of Router 1 from
communicating with the ring 1 of router 2. I think it should work ..
unfortunately i dont have the resources to test it out so if someone can
confirm this i will be grateful.
>From: "Atif Awan" <atifawan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Reply-To: "Atif Awan" <atifawan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 01:17:58
>if you have two DLSw remote peers configured on a router that has both a
>token ring and an ethernet interface. One of the peers has a token ring
>interface while the other has an ethernet interface. If the requirement is
>that the bridging connectivity between the token rings should be
>from the bridging connectivity between the ethernet segments then how can
>this be achieved ?
>Let me try to make this a little clear :
>Router 1 --------- Router2 ---------- Router 3
> | | | |
>ether ether ring1 ring 2
>Now if i have to configure dlsw between router1 and router 2 and then
>2 and router 3 and such that ether of router 1 should only be able to
>connect to the ether of router 2 and ring 1 of router 2 should be only able
>to connect to the ring 2 of router 3 and vice versa then how can this be
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>To unsubscribe from the CCIELAB list, send a message to
>majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with the body containing:
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
To unsubscribe from the CCIELAB list, send a message to
majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx with the body containing: