From: Peter Van Oene (vantech@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Jul 15 1999 - 14:21:39 GMT-3
The RIP/IGRP routers will assume a classful mask as you mentioned. However
they will chose that mask based on the configuration of their interfaces.
Is
there any chance you have a 16 bit mask on any interfaces in the 150.100
space on those edge routers?
Peter V
----- Original Message -----
From: Robichaux, Errol J (CAP, ITS, US) <Errol.Robichaux@gecits.ge.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 6:34 AM
Subject: VLSM - FLSM Problem
> I am experiencing minimal luck in my home lab with the following scenario:
>
> On edge-routers R1 and R4 I have networks of 150.100.1.0/24 and
> 150.100.2.0/24 respectively. The first edge-router is running IGRP and
the
> second edge-router is running RIP. OSPF and EIGRP lie in the middle. The
> routing protocol redistribution would be as follows if laid out:
>
> IGRP - OSPF - EIGRP - RIP
>
> R1 runs only IGRP. R3 runs IGRP and OSPF, therefore handling
> redistribution. R5 runs OSPF and EIGRP, therefore handling
redistribution.
> R4 runs RIP and EIGRP, therefore handling redistribution.
>
> The problem that I am experiencing is this. Since both routing protocols
at
> the edges do not support VLSM, they are advertising 150.100.0.0/16.
> Therefore, the routers in the middle only see one route.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Errol
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:21:42 GMT-3