实验拓扑:
试验要求: R1
通过 FR
分别与 R2
和 R3
相连, R2
与 R3
之间没有连接,形成一个 hub and spoke
网络拓扑结构,要求 R1 R2 R3
都采用点对点子接口。 试验目的:掌握 hub
路由器与 spoke
路由器都采用点对点子接口的时候 IP
的分配与其他情况下 IP
的分配的差别。 R1(config)#int s1/0.1 point-to-point
R1(config-subif)#ip add 172.16.3.3 255.255.255.0 R1(config-subif)#fram interface-dlci 301
R1(config)#int s1/0.2 point-to-point
R1(config-subif)#ip add 172.16.1.3 255.255.255.0 R1(config-subif)#fram interface-dlci 302
R1(config-fr-dlci)#no shu
R2(config)#int s1/0.1 point-to-point
R2(config-subif)#ip add 172.16.3.1 255.255.255.0 R2(config-subif)#fram interface-dlci 103
R2(config-fr-dlci)#no shu
R3(config)#int s1/0.1 point-to-point
R3(config-subif)#ip add 172.16.1.1 255.255.255.0 R3(config-subif)#fram interface-dlci 203
R3(config-fr-dlci)#no shu
好了,要特别注意 R1
的两个子接口的 IP
配置, hub
路由器点对点子接口的 IP
是不能够在同一网段的,切记!!! 下面在三台路由器上 show fram map
: Serial1/0.1 (up): point-to-point dlci, dlci 301(0x12D,0x48D0), broadcast
Serial1/0.2 (up): point-to-point dlci, dlci 302(0x12E,0x48E0), broadcast
Serial1/0.1 (up): point-to-point dlci, dlci 103(0x67,0x1870), broadcast
Serial1/0.1 (up): point-to-point dlci, dlci 203(0xCB,0x30B0), broadcast
全部都 active
了,现在分别在 R2
和 R3
上 ping R1
的相应接口: Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 172.16.3.3, timeout is 2 seconds:
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 180/242/288 ms
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 172.16.1.3, timeout is 2 seconds:
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 120/273/720 ms
好的,都可以 ping
通,那如果我在 R3
上去 ping172.16.3.3
会是什么结果呢? Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 172.16.3.3, timeout is 2 seconds:
Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)
无法 ping
通,让我们 debug ip pac
来看一下: IP packet debugging is on
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 172.16.3.3, timeout is 2 seconds:
*Mar 1 00:03:35.247: IP: s=172.16.1.1 (local), d=172.16.3.3, len 100,
unroutable.
*Mar 1 00:03:37.247: IP: s=172.16.1.1 (local), d=172.16.3.3, len 100,
unroutable.
*Mar 1 00:03:39.247: IP: s=172.16.1.1 (local), d=172.16.3.3, len 100,
unroutable.
*Mar 1 00:03:41.247: IP: s=172.16.1.1 (local), d=172.16.3.3, len 100,
unroutable.
*Mar 1 00:03:43.247: IP: s=172.16.1.1 (local), d=172.16.3.3, len 100,
unroutable.
Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)
出现 unroutable
,无法路由,因为不在同一网段,路由器需要查找路由表来进行转发,我们察看路由表可以看到并没有到 172.16.3.0
网段的路由,我们自己添加一条默认路由上去,下一跳指向 172.16.1.3
这个子接口,我们可以到 R1
上验证一下 172.16.1.3
能否到 172.16.3.3
: Target IP address: 172.16.1.3 Source address or interface: 172.16.3.3 Set DF bit in IP header? [no]:
Validate reply data? [no]:
Loose, Strict, Record, Timestamp, Verbose[none]:
Sweep range of sizes [n]:
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 172.16.1.3, timeout is 2 seconds:
Packet sent with a source address of 172.16.3.3
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 288/326/384 ms
R3(config)#ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 172.16.1.3
R2(config)#ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 172.16.3.3
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 172.16.1.3, timeout is 2 seconds:
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 144/176/192 ms
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 172.16.1.1, timeout is 2 seconds:
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 288/354/432 ms
实验总结:在 hub and spoke
拓扑结构中,如果 hub
路由器采用点对点子接口的话,每个点对点子接口配置的 IP
不能在同一个网段,在 spoke
路由器上还需要加上一条默认路由才可以与其他 spoke
路由器相互通讯。 写在最后:通过连载试验,我把 Frame-relay
在部分网格拓扑结构 hub
路由器与 spoke
路由器基本上所有用到的接口类型都演示了一遍,也演示了怎样让 spoke
路由器相互之间可以通信的方法,通过这几日的连载,大家应该可以掌握在 Frame-relay
部分网格拓扑结构中怎样配置 hub
和 spoke
路由器以适应不同的需求。希望大家能够喜欢! 本文转自loveme2351CTO博客,原文链接: http://blog.51cto.com/loveme23/43728 ,如需转载请自行联系原作者