03-04-2004 05:38 AM - edited 03-02-2019 02:01 PM
Just wondering if anyone has had this problem as well, but I have a wan setup where a router at a spoke site intermitantly locks up.
The only thing which seems to point to a problem with the secondary address is that routing between two subnets on the local site (spoke) are also affected during the fault. I am looking at changing this config to subinterfaces instead of the secondary addresses but would like a second option.
Here is the relevant extract from the current config.
sh run
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 2983 bytes
!
version 12.2
service timestamps debug datetime msec localtime
service timestamps log datetime msec localtime
no service password-encryption
!
hostname xxx
!
logging buffered 10000 debugging
!
clock timezone GMT 0
clock summer-time BST recurring last Sun Mar 1:00 last Sun Oct 1:00
ip subnet-zero
!
!
no ip domain-lookup
!
call rsvp-sync
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
interface FastEthernet0/0
no ip address
no ip split-horizon eigrp 100
duplex auto
speed auto
!
interface FastEthernet0/0.1101
encapsulation dot1Q 1101
ip address 172.16.31.6 255.255.255.252
no ip redirects
!
interface FastEthernet0/0.1111
encapsulation dot1Q 1111
ip address 172.16.32.6 255.255.255.252
--More-- no ip redirects
!
interface FastEthernet0/1
ip address 192.1.13.100 255.255.255.0 secondary
ip address 192.1.3.15 255.255.255.0
speed auto
half-duplex
!
router eigrp 100
redistribute connected
redistribute static
network 172.16.31.4 0.0.0.3
network 172.16.32.4 0.0.0.3
network 192.1.3.0
network 192.1.13.0
no auto-summary
!
ip classless
ip route 192.1.2.0 255.255.255.0 192.1.2.57
ip route 192.1.6.0 255.255.255.0 192.1.3.236
ip route 192.1.7.0 255.255.255.0 192.1.3.211
ip route 192.1.8.0 255.255.255.0 192.1.2.57
ip route 192.1.9.0 255.255.255.0 192.1.3.1
!
logging 192.1.3.166
snmp-server enable traps snmp authentication linkdown linkup coldstart warmstart
no snmp-server enable traps tty
snmp-server enable traps isdn call-information
snmp-server enable traps hsrp
snmp-server enable traps config
snmp-server enable traps entity
snmp-server enable traps envmon
snmp-server enable traps syslog
!
dial-peer cor custom
!
====================================================
version details are;
sh vers
Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software
IOS (tm) C2600 Software (C2600-IS-M), Version 12.2(21a), RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc2)
Copyright (c) 1986-2004 by cisco Systems, Inc.
Compiled Fri 09-Jan-04 19:40 by kellmill
Image text-base: 0x8000808C, data-base: 0x81116ADC
ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 12.2(7r) [cmong 7r], RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
xxx uptime is 6 hours, 30 minutes
System returned to ROM by power-on
System image file is "flash:c2600-is-mz.122-21a.bin"
cisco 2621XM (MPC860P) processor (revision 0x100) with 93184K/5120K bytes of memory.
Processor board ID xxx
M860 processor: part number 5, mask 2
Bridging software.
X.25 software, Version 3.0.0.
2 FastEthernet/IEEE 802.3 interface(s)
32K bytes of non-volatile configuration memory.
32768K bytes of processor board System flash (Read/Write)
Configuration register is 0x2102
Please help.
Regards,
Adrian.
Solved! Go to Solution.
03-06-2004 05:47 AM
You could potentially have all 4 ethernet segments on the same interface if you used dot1q trunking like you did for the first 2 subinterfaces... I wouldn't think that having the secondary IP address should be causing any problems though.
Personally I would nail the FastE's at 100/full if possible. Running them as "auto/auto" or "auto/half" isn't a good idea. I know that dot1q trunking off a router doesn't work very well on 10/half and I bet it would have some of the same problems with 100/half too. So I would recommend putting them on 100/full if possible...
03-06-2004 05:47 AM
You could potentially have all 4 ethernet segments on the same interface if you used dot1q trunking like you did for the first 2 subinterfaces... I wouldn't think that having the secondary IP address should be causing any problems though.
Personally I would nail the FastE's at 100/full if possible. Running them as "auto/auto" or "auto/half" isn't a good idea. I know that dot1q trunking off a router doesn't work very well on 10/half and I bet it would have some of the same problems with 100/half too. So I would recommend putting them on 100/full if possible...
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide