I would also like to see an answer to this question. I've seen examples when a Multilink Interface is createdand the Virtual-Template obviously requires the multilink group commandand I have also seen examples where the Multilink Interface is not presentand therefore the Virtual-Template does NOT use a multilink group command In such cases, the Virtual-Template only requires a ppp multilink commandand obvioulsy the IP address is configured directly on the Virtual-Template. It seems to me that we can ALWAYS use the second method (without the Multilink Interface), which would make this Multilink Interface TOTALLY irrelevant and unnecessary! But I guess there are cases when is needed.I just don't know what circumstances would make it useful/neededOf course, other than when we are explicitly asked to do it one way or the other. What do we exactly "gain" by using a Multilink Interface? I know that there are some OSPF implicationssince a Multilink Interface is seen by OSPF as a Point-to-Point linkwhile a Virtual-Template ......????? How does OSPF see a Virtual-Template by the way? Thanks!!
--- On Sun, 12/19/10, Don Lundquist <[email protected]> wrote: From: Don Lundquist <[email protected]> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] WorkBook 3, Lab5, Section 1.3 MLPPP To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Date: Sunday, December 19, 2010, 9:42 PM What is the main difference in either using an MLPPP Group configuration or a standard Virtual-Template interface configuration.. What should one watch for in the tasks that would indicate one vs the other? ( Other than the obvious "use a distributed group" method)... Regards, Don _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
