[c-nsp] Help with topology changes....

[Church, Chuck]

Richard,

	The next time a router has it's interface shut down, grab a 'sh
int', 'sh controller', and 'sh proc cpu' prior to reloading it.  Also a
'sh ver'.  Poor topology or not, the router int shouldn't shut down,
unless there's an odd loop or a DOS occurring on the subnet.  You
mentioned traffic from other subnets?  Are you redistributing this
branch default gateway into an IGP? 


Chuck Church
Lead Design Engineer
CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE
Netco Government Services - Design & Implementation Team
1210 N. Parker Rd.
Greenville, SC 29609
Home office: 864-335-9473
Cell: 703-819-3495
cchurch at netcogov.com
PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x4371A48D 


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Richard Golodner
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 3:50 PM
To: 'cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net'
Cc: Greg Starstrom; Jim Crickey
Subject: [c-nsp] Help with topology changes....

	We have recently seen our Ethernet interfaces shut down with the
introduction of some new network topology. For a number of years we have
been using IP unnumbered on our RFC 1918 Frame Links to simplify our
configuration at our branch offices. These frame links provide a
private,
unmeshed network between our branches and the corporate headquarters. 
	In the fall of 2004 we introduced DSL access to the internet at
our
branch offices. In order to protect against any threats we have added a
hardware based firewall at each location. In order to get these units to
route properly we were told by the manufacturer to add a gateway of last
resort routing statement to each branch router.  For example: ip route
0.0.0.0 192.168.9.2  Since doing this we have seen our Ethernet
interfaces
shut down on occasion due to what seems to be excessive overhead. I also
see
traffic from my other subnets in the firewall logs, which I am sure is a
result of the last resort statement. A simple reload brings the network
back
to life, but I would like to know if there exists a better configuration
than the one we are using.
	We are wondering if assigning an IP to the Serial Interface
rather
than using IP unnumbered would be better. 
	We are using Cisco 1720 with 48 megs of RAM and our clients are
XP
with service pack 2 applied. Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.


						Richard Golodner
						Network Manager
						Aetea Information
Technology
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/