The quad-serial supports an E1 link, which is 2.048 Mbps. 10^8/2.048e^6=48.
The old FSIPs defaulted to 1544, though.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Charles Sprickman [mailto:spork@inch.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 5:47 PM
> To: Faraz Shamim
> Cc: Martin Christian; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [nsp] OSPF quickie
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks to everyone for their replies. The problem is that
> the quad serial
> interface defaulted to a metric of 48, while a full T1 on the CT3 is
> weighted to 65. Changing it to 48 made everything happy.
>
> Faraz said it's fractional, but it's not... Both are full
> T's. Any idea
> why the defaults would differ?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charles
>
> | Charles Sprickman | Internet Channel
> | INCH System Administration Team | (212)243-5200
> | spork@inch.com | access@inch.com
>
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, Faraz Shamim wrote:
>
> > Charles,
> >
> > If you look at the show ip ospf nei output on router B:
> >
> > > 192.168.210.4 1 FULL/ - 00:00:32
> 192.168.200.202 Serial2/0
> > > 192.168.213.1 1 FULL/ - 00:00:39
> 192.168.200.65 Serial4/0
> > > 192.168.210.4 1 FULL/ - 00:00:33
> 192.168.200.206 Serial5/0/1:0
> >
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > This Serial5/0/1:0 is a fractional T1 and if you do show
> int for this
> > you will see a bandwidth value of 64K where as Serial 2/0 would show
> > you the bandwidth as 1544K. Obviously route B would prefer
> all routes
> > via serial2/0.
> >
> > Faraz Shamim
> > sshamim@cisco.com
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Martin, Christian wrote:
> > >
> > > > Chales,
> > > >
> > > > Can you draw this out? Which side cannot see the
> other? Is the new split
> > > > side connected to a LAN? Is there a DR election happening here?
> > >
> > > 2xT1
> > > -------- router A
> > > router C
> > > 2xT1
> > > -------- router B
> > >
> > > I simply moved "C" from "A" to "B" (no ip changes). A and B have
> > > identical configs for ospf and the two serial interfaces.
> A and B are
> > > connected via a T3 and speak OSPF. There were no changes
> made to C. C
> > > sees routes via both T1's. B only sees routes via one T1.
> > >
> > > 'show ip ospf neigh detail' verifies that both links are
> up and exchanging
> > > routes. Here's the brief output:
> > >
> > > C:
> > > Inch-Whitehall-gw>show ip ospf neighbor
> > >
> > > Neighbor ID Pri State Dead Time Address
> > > Interface
> > > 192.168.210.1 1 FULL/ - 00:00:36
> 192.168.200.205 Serial0/0
> > > 192.168.210.1 1 FULL/ - 00:00:36
> 192.168.200.201 Serial0/1
> > >
> > > (here's a route learned from B)
> > > Inch-Whitehall-gw>show ip route 192.168.198.0
> > > Routing entry for 192.168.198.0/24, 2 known subnets
> > > [...]
> > > O E2 192.168.198.0/26 [110/20] via 192.168.200.201,
> 1d11h, Serial0/1
> > > [110/20] via 192.168.200.205,
> 1d11h, Serial0/0
> > >
> > > B:
> > >
> > > core-2>sh ip ospf neighbor
> > >
> > > Neighbor ID Pri State Dead Time Address
> > > Interface
> > > 192.168.210.4 1 FULL/ - 00:00:32
> 192.168.200.202 Serial2/0
> > > 192.168.213.1 1 FULL/ - 00:00:39
> 192.168.200.65 Serial4/0
> > > 192.168.210.4 1 FULL/ - 00:00:33
> 192.168.200.206 Serial5/0/1:0
> > > (2/0 and 5/0/1 are the two T1's)
> > >
> > > (here's a route learned from C - only one path)
> > > core-2>show ip route 192.168.192.0
> > > Routing entry for 192.168.192.0/24, 4 known subnets
> > > Variably subnetted with 4 masks
> > > Redistributing via ospf 1
> > >
> > > O E2 192.168.192.128/30 [110/20] via 192.168.200.202,
> 1d11h, Serial2/0
> > > O E2 192.168.192.64/27 [110/20] via 192.168.200.202,
> 1d11h, Serial2/0
> > > O E2 192.168.192.96/28 [110/20] via 192.168.200.202,
> 1d11h, Serial2/0
> > >
> > > Any ideas? Sorry for all the clutter, I was hoping that
> putting all this
> > > info together would help me see the problem...
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Charles
> > >
> > > > chris
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Charles Sprickman [mailto:spork@inch.com]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 11:52 AM
> > > > > To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > > > > Subject: [nsp] OSPF quickie
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Small OSPF problem that's got me scratching my
> head... I just moved a
> > > > > connection from one router to another (two T1's).
> Both the previous
> > > > > router these went back to and the new one are in the same
> > > > > ospf area, and
> > > > > I've verified that all the neighbors see each other.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the old router, I was seeing routes from the remote side
> > > > > via both T1
> > > > > connections, which gave me a sort of load-balancing between
> > > > > the two lines.
> > > > > On the new router, even though I see the remote side listed
> > > > > as a neighbor
> > > > > twice, I only see routes via one T1.
> > > > >
> > > > > OSPF config is identical on both routers, is there a
> global switch I'm
> > > > > missing somewhere? I know this is something silly and
> > > > > obvious, but I'm
> > > > > not seeing it... Old router is running 12.0.7T, new
> is 12.0.7XE1.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Charles
> > > > >
> > > > > | Charles Sprickman | Internet Channel
> > > > > | INCH System Administration Team | (212)243-5200
> > > > > | spork@inch.com | access@inch.com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:33 EDT