nanog mailing list archives
Re: sanity check frame question
From: "Stephen Sprunk" <ssprunk () cisco com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 09:06:12 -0500
Thus spake <Brennan_Murphy () NAI com>
I have a Frame connection between two sites, A and B. If the router crashes at B, wouldn't A still see the DLCI for B? Is there any scenario where this wouldn't be the case? If B gets blown off the map, shouldnt A's frame interface be in at least an up/down scenario?
In theory, when the remote LMI goes down, or any part of the PVC internal to the carrier goes down, the local LMI should go INACTIVE. In practice, this is unreliable at best; for some carriers, you will always get ACTIVE status no matter what. ATM has a similar feature/problem with ILMI. The only solution is to ignore the carrier and do it yourself end-to-end (gosh, where have we heard that before?). End-to-End Keepalives for FR: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/wan_r/wr dfrely.htm#xtocid18 OAM Loopback for ATM: http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios120/12cgcr/wan_r/wro ampvc.htm#xtocid0
If the DLCI disappeared, doesn't that suggest that someone deleted the PVC?
Distinguish between INACTIVE and DELETED; those represent very different things in LMI. S
Current thread:
- sanity check frame question Brennan_Murphy (Aug 22)
- Re: sanity check frame question Stephen Sprunk (Aug 22)
- Re: sanity check frame question alex (Aug 22)
- Re: sanity check frame question Stephen Sprunk (Aug 22)
- Re: sanity check frame question alex (Aug 22)
- Re: sanity check frame question Stephen Sprunk (Aug 22)