[nsp] /30 over WAN links

Mussie Gebregziabiher MGebregziabiher at sevenspace.com
Mon Feb 9 10:59:19 EST 2004

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
interface Serial0/0
 description ISP-Link
 ip unnumbered Loopback0
interface FastEthernet0/0
 description Customer LAN
 ip address

ip route 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. :-)


cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list