[nsp] /30 over WAN links

[Mussie Gebregziabiher]

As far as the unumbered is concerend, most of the implementation I have
seen they reference Customer LAN interface with /27-29.  Here is another
variation ....  

interface Loopback0
 ip address 1.1.1.2 255.255.255.255
!
interface Serial0/0
 description ISP-Link
 ip unnumbered Loopback0
!
interface FastEthernet0/0
 description Customer LAN
 ip address 2.2.2.0 255.255.255.224

ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Serial0/0

Does this help from layer-3 monitoring perspective, since loopback
interface is always up. 

-Mussie G.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Snyder [mailto:rsnyder at toontown.erial.nj.us] 
Sent: Saturday, February 07, 2004 2:17 PM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [nsp] /30 over WAN links


Rubens Kuhl Jr. wrote:

>Any scenario that would require or prefer numbered links nowadays ?
>
>  
>
I tend to prefer numbered links, since it makes it possible to cleanly 
test using ping that a circuit is up. With unnumbered, this isn't as 
easy, at least in cases where there are multiple paths to the remote 
side. Then again, I dislike Multilink PPP and IMA for the same reason, 
where circuits can go down without anyone noticing. Suppose I'd be more 
tolerent if I'd worked in an environment with good SNMP monitoring 
systems. :-)

Bob

_______________________________________________
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/