> I don't know if you can do this or not, but try setting the preference on > dialout routes to 200, leaving the preference on the dialin routes at the > default of 60. You may have to have 2 seperate profiles for dialin and > dialout. I have. Basically the dialouts with 1 Max work fine. Now it's just up to me implementing a 2nd one. The question is: HOW to set the preference for the dialout-routes? > This should cause the Max that recieves the callback to announce the route > with a higher preference, causing the rest of your network to behave > properly. > > Worth a try anyways. Indeed indeed. Thanks so far! Sascha > > ** -----Original Message----- > ** From: sp at locus.tech.iphh.de [mailto:sp at locus.tech.iphh.de]On Behalf Of > ** Sascha E. Pollok > ** Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 2:40 PM > ** To: Troy Settle > ** Cc: ascend-users at bungi.com > ** Subject: RE: (ASCEND) Multiple Maxen design question > ** > ** > ** Troy, thanks for replying, > ** > ** > Failing a multi-chassis solution, have you considered announcing your > ** > dialout routes on the last max in your huntgroup (ie. the one > ** least likely > ** > to have all B channels in use). > ** > ** There is actually no problems with dialing out. The problem is just > ** with the routes advertised (or not) via OSPF. If the last max in the > ** huntgroup dials out and the user calls back and gets logged onto let's > ** say the 1st max, I don't get the IP subnet that the user get's assigned > ** into the OSPF routing table but only the /32 announcement of the > ** remote router's ip address. The Cisco-Router infront of the Maxen > ** still see the /30, /29, /28 or whatever pointing to the dialout-max. > ** The only route that is propagated via OSPF is the /32 host route although > ** the user gets a whole subnet assigned. It seems that the Max the user > ** dials into doesn't advertise the subnet-route because there is already > ** a route within the OSPF domain (coming from the dialout-max). I tried > ** raising the metric for the dialout-routes but that doesn't help anything. > ** > ** <sigh> > ** Sascha > ** > ** > > ** > ** -----Original Message----- > ** > ** From: owner-ascend-users at max.bungi.com > ** > ** [mailto:owner-ascend-users at max.bungi.com]On Behalf Of > ** Sascha E. Pollok > ** > ** Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2001 9:03 AM > ** > ** To: Greg Daley > ** > ** Cc: ascend-users at bungi.com > ** > ** Subject: Re: (ASCEND) Multiple Maxen design question > ** > ** > ** > ** > ** > ** > >Imagine the situation where there is a single Max > ** > ** > >with 2xPRI (30 channels each). There is a primary > ** > ** > >and backup radius-server for authentication > ** > ** > >and accounting. In addition to authenticating callers > ** > ** > >with Username/Password and/or Caller-ID, most of > ** > ** > >the users get an IP assignment out of a pool. Some > ** > ** > >callers are getting static ip assignments > ** (Framed-Address/Netmask). > ** > ** > >The Max is advertising it's dialup-routes via OSPF. > ** > ** > >The pool gets summarized. > ** > ** > > > ** > ** > >Within Radius there are also some static routes with > ** > ** > >dialup-profiles configured (customers with own mailserver > ** > ** > >and thingies like that). > ** > ** > > > ** > ** > >All is working fine. Now imagine i'd like to add a 2nd > ** > ** > >Max to the network due to lack of B-Channels. A 2nd > ** > ** > >one is already mounted in the rack, the PRI's are almost > ** > ** > >ready and will be reachable via the same number than > ** > ** > >the current ones. > ** > ** > > > ** > ** > >Now problems arise. With only users dialing in and getting > ** > ** > >pool or static IP assignments there would be no problem > ** > ** > >because the Maxen advertise the IPs connected via OSPF. > ** > ** > >The Maxen have different pools configured. > ** > ** > >But what about dialout profiles? I could set the Max's name > ** > ** > >in the static routes (on the radius-server), so that only > ** > ** > >one of the Max's places calls but that wouldn't help > ** > ** > >because if they dial in instead of getting called and they > ** > ** > >connect to the non-dialing-Max, the "wanna-dial" Max > ** > ** > >would still advertise the dialout-routes via OSPF and > ** > ** > >we would have two identical routes within the OSPF domain. > ** > ** > > ** > ** > You can advertise a dialout route on one max, > ** > ** > but have lower preference for that route than for > ** > ** > the actively connected route, which is configured by > ** > ** > radius. > ** > ** > > ** > ** > The route which will be preferred and propagated by ospf > ** > ** > would be the "up" route. > ** > ** > ** > ** Greg, > ** > ** > ** > ** I read you answer once again and noticed that you are not > ** > ** talking 'bout metrics but about preferences. I set > ** > ** OSPF ASE Preference = 60 on both Maxen and set the metric > ** > ** of the Dialout-Routes in Radius to some higher value (10). > ** > ** What's happening looks good at first sight: The Ciscorouter > ** > ** sees the route adv. by the Max1 (Max with dialout-routes) > ** > ** with Metric 11. Now, when the user dials in on Max2 > ** > ** (w/o dialout-routes), the route on the Cisco changes > ** > ** to the one with the lower metric (2) and all is working > ** > ** fine. I was happy :-) Until I noticed problems with > ** > ** users having not one single static IP Adress but > ** > ** a subnet like in radius: > ** > ** > ** > ** Framed-Address = 192.168.1.53, > ** > ** Framed-Netmask = 255.255.255.252, > ** > ** Framed-Route = "192.168.1.52/30 192.168.1.53 1", > ** > ** > ** > ** The Max where the user dials in gets two routes. One > ** > ** of the directly connected remote router (192.168.1.53/32) > ** > ** and the rest of the subnet: 192.168.1.52/30 192.168.1.53. > ** > ** But THAT 2nd route does not get advertised by the Max > ** > ** where the user has dialed in. Perhaps because there is > ** > ** a 2nd route looking similar (the dialout-route adv. by Max1): > ** > ** > ** > ** max2% sh ip route 192.168.1.52 > ** > ** > ** > ** Destination Gateway IF Flg Pref Met > ** Use Age > ** > ** 192.168.1.52/30 192.168.1.53 wan18 rGT 60 1 > ** 0 389 > ** > ** 192.168.1.52/30 <max1's-IP> ie0 *OG 60 10 > ** > ** 0 1224 > ** > ** > ** > ** You see that the 1st route is preferred (obviously because > ** it's connected > ** > ** to Wan18 and the metric is 1) but it won't get advertised! > ** Here's that > ** > ** the Max1 (Dialout Max) sees, while the user is connected to Max2: > ** > ** > ** > ** max1% sh ip route 192.168.1.52 > ** > ** > ** > ** Destination Gateway IF Flg Pref Met > ** Use Age > ** > ** 192.168.1.52/30 192.168.1.53 wanidle0 SG 120 10 > ** 33 1252 > ** > ** > ** > ** The Ciscorouter is only seeing this dialout-route of Max1. I don't > ** > ** know where to get any further. > ** > ** > ** > ** Last night I sat 3h infront of them boxes and everytime I changed > ** > ** something to OSPF and rebooted one, waiting 10 minutes > ** after rebooting > ** > ** until the Telco is again routing calls to this PRI, I fell asleep > ** > ** on my desk for about 30 minutes, wasting 20 minutes time :-))) I am > ** > ** really stuck here. > ** > ** > ** > ** Any help is greatly appreciated! > ** > ** > ** > ** Thanks! > ** > ** Sascha > ** > ** > ** > ** > ** > ** ++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++ > ** > ** To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request at bungi.com > ** > ** To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq> > ** > ** > ** > ** > ** > > ** > ++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++ > ** > To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request at bungi.com > ** > To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq> > ** > > ** > ** > > ++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++ To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request at bungi.com To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>