|
Home > Archive > CCNP > July 2002 > Router to Router - encapsulation?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Router to Router - encapsulation?
|
|
|
| Hello all,
I'm trying to config two routers to talk to each other via direct serial connection on serial ports (s0 on both).
It wouldn't ping... so i'm thinking that i need to set the encapsulation method. What encapsulation method should I use? Right now i'm getting an error message indicating "protocol is down".
I tried to ping the other routerA (s0 address 192.168.3.1) from routerB (s0 address 192.168.3.2) but it wouldn't respond.
Here's router A's s0 address output:
calrouter#sh int s0
Serial0 is up, line protocol is down
Hardware is HD64570
Internet address is 192.168.3.1/24
MTU 1500 bytes, BW 1544 Kbit, DLY 20000 usec, rely 255/255, load 1/255
Encapsulation HDLC, loopback not set, keepalive set (10 sec)
Last input never, output 00:00:19, output hang never
Last clearing of "show interface" counters never
Input queue: 0/75/0 (size/max/drops); Total output drops: 0
Queueing strategy: weighted fair
Output queue: 0/1000/64/0 (size/max total/threshold/drops)
Conversations 0/1/256 (active/max active/max total)
Reserved Conversations 0/0 (allocated/max allocated)
5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
0 packets input, 0 bytes, 0 no buffer
Received 0 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored, 0 abort
1092 packets output, 75277 bytes, 0 underruns
0 output errors, 0 collisions, 58 interface resets
0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out
95 carrier transitions
DCD=up DSR=up DTR=up RTS=up CTS=up
Here's routerB's s0 address output:
Router#sh int s0
Serial0 is up, line protocol is down
Hardware is HD64570
Internet address is 192.168.3.2/24
MTU 1500 bytes, BW 1544 Kbit, DLY 20000 usec, rely 255/255, load 1/255
Encapsulation HDLC, loopback not set, keepalive set (10 sec)
Last input never, output 00:00:10, output hang never
Last clearing of "show interface" counters never
Input queue: 0/75/0 (size/max/drops); Total output drops: 0
Queueing strategy: weighted fair
Output queue: 0/1000/64/0 (size/max total/threshold/drops)
Conversations 0/1/256 (active/max active/max total)
Reserved Conversations 0/0 (allocated/max allocated)
5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
0 packets input, 0 bytes, 0 no buffer
Received 0 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored, 0 abort
60 packets output, 1402 bytes, 0 underruns
0 output errors, 0 collisions, 39 interface resets
0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out
60 carrier transitions
DCD=up DSR=up DTR=up RTS=up CTS=up
I tried setting the clock rate for s0:
#Router(config-if)#clock rate 64000
but it wouldn't work.
I appreciate any response.
Thanks, | |
| rsteedma 2002-07-14, 7:06 pm |
| Hi Alany,
Your encapsulation is fine - both sides are using cHDLC encapsulation.
Can you try using "clockrate" since "clock rate" did not work?
Also look at the "show controller s0" output.
Cisco has a great article on debugging Serial interfaces here:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td...tm#xtocid195572
Let us know what happens! I'm curious. 
Cheers,
Ron
>>>>> http://www.congonetworking.com/ccnp.htm <<<<<
Free CCNP Message Board & Practice Tests - You're Invited! | |
| rsteedma 2002-07-14, 7:07 pm |
| Can you elaborate on what you meant by "clock rate didn't work"?
Cheers,
Ron | |
| Yankee 2002-07-15, 2:59 am |
| Don't believe you mentioned using a DCE to DTE cable between the two serials. Need to do that and add the clock rate command to the DCE side.
Yankee | |
|
| Yankee... you're good!!! I found this out last night. I accidently typed in the wrong command... should be "clockrate 64000". Thanks so much and also thank for your feedback on the other post. I got it to work by changing config reg to 0x2102. Thanks! | |
| alany 2002-07-15, 10:59 am |
| need a little more help...
I'm configuring two routers with network address 192.168.1.0 (first network), 192.168.2.0 (second network). The two-router DTE DCE addresses are 192.168.3.1-2, respectively.
Computers behind network 1.0 can ping computers behind network 2.0 no problem there. Computers behind network 1.0 can connect to the Internet just fine. I use the ip default network command to make this happen (i.e. #ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 <firewall trusted address> ). So here's how it looks for network 1.0: Internet -> Firewall (untrusted and trusted) -> Cisco 2500 -> switch.
The question now is how can I get computers behind network 2.0 to connect to the internet. I tried using the same ip default network command (i.e. #ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 <firewall trusted address> ), but it didn't work.
I appreciate any feedback. | |
| Yankee 2002-07-15, 12:37 pm |
| Ya confused me a bit in that you said you are using 2 routers yet your diagram showed only one. I suspect it is :
internet-FW-2500A-serial-2500B-switch
If that's the case the static route on router B should have the next hop address of router A's for the destination:
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 <routerA ser0 ip address>
Yankee | |
|
| Sorry to confuse you... your diagram is correct. The command you suggested was exactly what I used to begin with, but it still didn't work and I think I understand why. Currently, I'm using a Sonicwall firewall for this setup and it only allows network 192.168.1.0 to connect to the Internet and vice versa. So I need to add network 192.168.2.0 and 192.168.3.0 to allow routing and connection to the Internet.
I have a Cisco PIX that I can use which I'm more familiar with. I also have Netscreen to test this lab. PIX apparently is the best among all... as much as I like the Check Point firewall.
Off the subject... if anyone intends to purchase a firewall for SOHO or lab use go with the Cisco PIX 501 model. It's very good. I've used VPN on PIX and it offers much more flexibilities.
Anyway if you have any thoughts on this, please advise. Thanks! | |
| sukuvi 2002-07-16, 11:18 pm |
| The problem might be that, if the only address that the firewall will allow is 192.168.1.0, then 192.168.2.0 cannot be summarized into it. This is why it doesn't go through.
If the only address you could use is 192.168.1.0 then you will need to create subnets from this address in such a way that their summary would be the 192.168.1.0
192.168.2.0 cannot be a subnet of 192.168.1.0
You will start by first deciding how many subnets you need and how many hosts maximum in each subnet.
Supposing you need 6 subnets. With 2 bits you could get 4 subnets (including the all 0 and the all 1 subnets). But with 3 bits you get 8 subnets.
The first subnet will be 000, the second 001... and the last will be 111, the broadcast address.
00000000 192.168.1.0
00100000 192.168.1.32
01000000 192.168.1.64
01100000 192.168.1.96
10000000 192.168.1.128
10100000 192.168.1.160
11000000 192.168.1.192
11100000 192.168.1.224
Your subnet mask will then be 27bits=24+3, which is 255.255.255.224
All these addresses will be summarized into 192.168.1.0/24 or 255.255.255.0 even the first subnet 192.168.1.0/27
The host addresses come naturally with each subnet taking up to 30 hosts, confirmed by the number of bits left in the last octet after using the first 3.
5 bits left, so the number of hosts is 2 at the power of 5=32 minus 2 (subnet address and broadcast address).
Try this subnetting from the 192.168.1.0/24 and let us know what happens. |
|
|
|
|