I don't why, I just pasted what my solution was. It doesn't look like its needed.
On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Meraz, Richard <[email protected]>wrote: > Bryan, > > > > I tried it with the script you sent, but omitted the frame-relay > interface-dlci command and was able to ping both .0 and .1 on both sides. I > was just wondering why you included the frame-relay interface-dlci command > after the map statements? (I thought we only did that when we needed to > apply a map class for traffic shaping.) > > > > Thanks, > Rich > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Bryan Bartik [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Friday, July 03, 2009 8:25 AM > *To:* Meraz, Richard > *Cc:* CCIE OSL > *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol2 Sec 8 Task 2.2 > > > > Richard, > > Yes you are right about the B2B Frame Relay. DLCI's don;t have to be the > same as long as you map them properly on each side. Like this: > > R6: > interface MFR1 > ip address 172.30.96.0 255.255.255.254 > no keepalive > frame-relay map ip 172.30.96.0 609 > frame-relay map ip 172.30.96.1 906 broadcast > frame-relay interface-dlci 609 > > R9: > interface MFR1 > ip address 172.30.96.1 255.255.255.254 > no keepalive > frame-relay map ip 172.30.96.1 906 > frame-relay map ip 172.30.96.0 609 broadcast > frame-relay interface-dlci 609 > > On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 9:00 AM, Meraz, Richard <[email protected]> > wrote: > > The task asks to configure the two links between R6 and R9 using DLIC 609 > on R6 and DLCI 906 for 172.30.96.0/31. The PG has a multilink solution. > Shouldn’t this be configured for MFR? Also, since this is back to back > frame relay, don’t the DLCIs have to be the same on both sides? > > > > Thanks, > Rich > > > > > > > -- > Bryan Bartik > CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP > Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc. > URL: http://www.IPexpert.com > -- Bryan Bartik CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc. URL: http://www.IPexpert.com
