Frame Relay Physical int versus Multipoint interface ?
In my lab I have created a 'Hub & Spoke' network. I want my spokes to reside on the same network address so I can choose between using the physical interface at the hub or a multipoint interface at the hub.
Why would I prefer one technique to the other ? As I see it 'one' physical interface is taken up by both methods !
Also with both techniques I can achieve solutions using inverse arp or static mappings.
Re: Frame Relay Physical int versus Multipoint interface ?
As far as a lab is concerned I am not sure that you are missing much of anything and both implementations are quite similar. In a live network I might prefer to use the multilink subinterface because it potentially makes things a bit more predictable. Since you have to assign the PVCs/DLCIs to the subinterface you know exactly what is there. If the provider should happen to provision another PVC/DLCI on the connection (perhaps by mistake) Cisco will assign that DLCI to the physical interface. If your multipoint implementation is on the physical interface then there is potential disruption in your network because of the new active connection. If your implementation is on the subinterface then there is no impact.
We are pleased to announce availability of Beta software for 16.6.3.
16.6.3 will be the second rebuild on the 16.6 release train targeted
towards Catalyst 9500/9400/9300/3850/3650 switching platforms. We are
looking for early feedback from customers befor...
Introduction Featured Speakers Luis Espejel is the Telecommunications
Manager of IENova, an Oil & Gas company. Currently he works with Cisco
IOS® and Cisco IOS XE platforms, and NX to some extent. He has also
worked as a Senior Engineer with the Routing P...
In this session you can learn more about Layer 3 multicast and the best
practices to identify possible threats and take security measures. It
provides an overview of basic multicast, the best security practices for
use of this technology, and recommendati...