- Community Home
- >
- Networking
- >
- Legacy
- >
- Switches, Hubs, Modems
- >
- 7102dl and multiple T1s
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО05-30-2008 06:02 AM
тАО05-30-2008 06:02 AM
7102dl and multiple T1s
Our goal is to have them bonded together for more bandwidth. Currently, we have a Cisco 2600 with 2 T1's but now that we're adding a 3rd we bought a 7102dl with 2 2xT1 modules.
Our ISP has no staff with experience on HP products. Finding anyone with HP router experiance seems to be a daunting task.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО05-30-2008 07:52 AM
тАО05-30-2008 07:52 AM
Re: 7102dl and multiple T1s
please see page 29
ftp://ftp.hp.com/pub/networking/software/ProCurve-SR-T1-E1-WAN-Config-Guide.pdf
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-10-2008 03:49 PM
тАО06-10-2008 03:49 PM
Re: 7102dl and multiple T1s
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-11-2008 12:35 AM
тАО06-11-2008 12:35 AM
Re: 7102dl and multiple T1s
you can't configuration hdlc virtual interface on multilink operations
if you want make multilink configuration only ppp and frema relay interface under T1 line
hdlc virtual interface can't multilink operation
please look page 15-16 and you be carefully page 16 on web interface multilik tab.
ftp://ftp.hp.com/pub/networking/software/ProCurve-SR-T1-E1-WAN-Config-Guide.pdf
cenk
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-11-2008 01:11 AM
тАО06-11-2008 01:11 AM
Re: 7102dl and multiple T1s
I think for hdlc;can't use company for internet connection because insecure line you
but may ISP use this protocol because very simple config
you look say cisco;
Why Use HDLC?
The reason why a user requires HDLC on the ISDN is not obvious, since it has a lot of disadvantages compared to PPP. The only purpose is to simplify the configuration. However, it also simplifies access to the router for any hackers. HDLC does not support any kind of authentication, hence the best protection here would be to verify the calling number with the isdn caller command on your interface. Refer to Configuring CLI Screening or ISDN Authentication and Callback with Caller ID for additional information. Calling line ID (CLID) based authentication assumes that your Telco supplies the calling number in the ISDN setup messages. However, since many Telcos do not supply CLID, verify with your Telco before you configure CLID-based screening. If CLID is not supplied by the Telco, then all incoming calls into the router fail.
Another disadvantage of HDLC is that the router does not install a dynamic map. Therefore, a dialer map needs to be configured (on each end) for the HDLC peer.
Note: If only one side makes the call (for example, one router always accepts the call and does not dialout) make sure that you include a name for the remote peer in the dialer map statement of the receiving side. However, the name can be a fake name since the router has no way to authenticate the peer name to determine if it matches the dialer map name.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk801/tk133/technologies_configuration_example09186a00800945be.shtml#backinfo
I think you speak your ISP for don't use hdlc protocol for security also for multilink
cenk
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-11-2008 01:42 PM
тАО06-11-2008 01:42 PM
Re: 7102dl and multiple T1s
Our Cisco 2611 (our current router) has 2 of the 3 T1's setup (team/bond/whatever you call it) to get 3.0/Mb up/down. I need that same speed on the new HP. I need to be able to add the 3rd T1 to get 1.5 Mb x 3.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-16-2008 06:54 AM
тАО06-16-2008 06:54 AM
Re: 7102dl and multiple T1s
Here is our Cisco config that is currently on a 2611 with 2 T1 WIC cards. The 2 T1's are bonded together to double the speed.
I've changed some of the IP's for obvious reasons.
--------------------------
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 1348 bytes
!
! No configuration change since last restart
!
version 12.2
service timestamps debug datetime localtime
service timestamps log datetime localtime
service password-encryption
!
hostname tri-rt1-atx
!
boot system flash c2600-d-mz.122-34a.bin
logging buffered 40000 informational
enable secret *i removed this, duh*
!
clock timezone CST -6
clock summer-time CDT recurring 2 Sun Mar 2:00 1 Sun Nov 2:00
ip subnet-zero
no ip source-route
ip cef
!
!
ip telnet source-interface Ethernet0/0
ip domain-name texas.net
ip name-server 207.207.0.3
ip name-server 206.127.0.3
!
!
controller T1 0/1
framing esf
linecode b8zs
channel-group 0 timeslots 1-24 speed 64
!
!
!
interface Ethernet0/0
ip address xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx 255.255.255.224
half-duplex
!
interface Serial0/0
description Texas.net T1
ip address 207.207.25.94 255.255.255.252
no ip mroute-cache
down-when-looped
!
interface Ethernet0/1
no ip address
shutdown
half-duplex
!
interface Serial0/1:0
description Texas.net T1[2]
ip address 206.127.10.182 255.255.255.252
ip load-sharing per-packet
down-when-looped
!
ip classless
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 207.207.52.93
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 206.127.10.181
no ip http server
!
!
line con 0
line aux 0
line vty 0 4
password 7 0509561970421D
login
!
ntp clock-period 17207260
ntp server 128.83.185.41
ntp server 128.83.185.40
end
--------------------------
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО06-17-2008 02:04 PM
тАО06-17-2008 02:04 PM
Re: 7102dl and multiple T1s
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО07-14-2008 01:52 PM
тАО07-14-2008 01:52 PM
Re: 7102dl and multiple T1s
You can do the same thing with the 7102 router. Your Cisco config currently has 2 seperate link with 2 different IPs. It is loadbalancing at layer 3, not bonding. If you get 3 different links from your provider with 3 different IPs, configure 3 static routes, enable load-balancing and you are good to go. What people have been talking about in previous messages is "bonding or bundling" at layer 2. Only ML-Frame-relay or MLPPP will do that. One logical interfaces (1 IP address) with multiple physical links. What you are doing is 3 logical/physical interfaces with 3 different IP addresses. That will also work on the 7102dl router. One word of caution (Cisco and HP)! You enabled "ip load-sharing" per-packet. This is dangerous. You might get lots of "out of sequence" packet and retransmissions. If you use "per destination", this won't happen but you only get 1.5Mbit per flow. Example: User A downloads a file from Google via ftp. Result: only 1.5Mbit throughput. User B downloads a file from Yahoo via ftp. He also only get 1.5Mbit. But together, they get 3.0Mbit. This will be faster than load-sharing by packet because you shouldn't see any "out-of-sequence" packets nor retransmissions.
Hope this helps.
Olaf