From: Stanislav Sinyagin (SSinyagin@xxxxxx)
Date: Wed Jan 12 2000 - 05:27:25 GMT-3
that's not *working*, I'd rather call it a *bug*.
Cisco docs exactly specify what and when summary-address command does,
and we can consider any other behaviour as a bug. I believe
we should know well documented and valid behaviour before the exam,
not those tricks with buggy software.
More frequently a bug doesn't allow a route to appear, and it appears
only after a reboot.
Stan
----- Original Message -----
From: Darrel E. Hinshaw <dhinshaw@istrength.net>
To: 'Stanislav Sinyagin' <SSinyagin@mtu.ru>; 'Chad Marsh' <chad@wa.net>
Cc: 'CCIE List (E-mail)' <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2000 23:24
Subject: RE: Re[2]: VLSM ---> FLSM or OSPF --> IGRP
> But it does work. . . . only intermitently. If you put everything in place
> and then do
>
> summary-address 150.100.5.0 255.255.255.0
>
> in the ospf 5 you get what I want (Null0 route to 150.100.5.0/24). If you
> write to memory and reboot you lose it; however, the summary-address command
> still shows in the config. Manually enter the summ-add command and it will
> work again. (The null0 route shows up until the reboot).
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stanislav Sinyagin [mailto:SSinyagin@mtu.ru]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2000 1:02 PM
> To: Chad Marsh
> Cc: Darrel E. Hinshaw; CCIE List (E-mail)
> Subject: Re[2]: VLSM ---> FLSM or OSPF --> IGRP
>
>
> if so, why Darrel's config didn't work ? I tested it in my lab, it
> really didn't work.
>
> Chad Marsh <chad@wa.net> wrote:
> CM> Stan, I agree with your interpretation of the commands 100%, however,
> CM> summary-address will summarize into and out of OSPF on an ASBR, i have
> CM> set it up and seen it working numerous times. It was a shock to me the
> CM> first time I saw it used that way, I guess it's just an undocumented
> CM> 'feature'.
> CM> If the networks specified in the summary-address are external to the
> CM> OSPF domain, it will summarize them when redistributing INTO OSPF.
> CM> If the networks specified in the summary-address are internal to the
> CM> OSPF domain, it will summarize them when redistibuting FROM OSPF into
> CM> another routing protocol.
>
> CM> Chad Marsh
> CM> CCIE# 5185
>
>
> CM> Stanislav Sinyagin wrote:
> >>
> >> Guys, I suspect you're both wrong.
> >>
> >> Read the OSPF commands from CiscoCD:
> >>
> >> "area range" is useful only on ABR routers, to tell the other area
> >> that my area can be summarized this way. You don't have any ABR,
> >> so get this command away.
> >>
> >> "summary-address" is used on ASBR only, and it tells the router to
> >> inject into OSPF aggregared route, instead of many small ones.
> >> You don't have any problem in redistributing INTO OSPF, so
> >> get this off too.
> >>
> >> I didn't yet invent the solution, but I'm 100% sure these two commands
> >> won't ever help (and they don't, as I see in the routing tables 8^)
> >>
> >> Good luck,
> >> Stan
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Darrel E. Hinshaw <dhinshaw@istrength.net>
> >> To: CCIE List (E-mail) <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2000 18:19
> >> Subject: RE: VLSM ---> FLSM or OSPF --> IGRP
> >>
> >> > Everyone,
> >> >
> >> > Sorry for responding to this but I have a beef. Could everyone please
> read
> >> > and ReRead an e-mail before you decide to reply to it. As you can see
> from
> >> > the gentleman's response below (I do Appreciate the response but just
> wish
> >> > that it had been appropriate) he provided valid correct information but
> if
> >> > he had read my original e-mail he would have seen the summary-address
> >> > command that he referred to and could have perhaps shed more useful
> light on
> >> > the issue.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > This is not meant to bruise anybody's feeling but rather this should be
> >> > taken as constructive criticism that will allow this list to become
> more
> >> > productive for all of us.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ***** RESPONSE ******
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Summarise all routes to /24 at area boundaries.Since major class is
> same and
> >> > mask is same all routes shoud go in to IGRP.U can use summary-address
> also
> >> > for this purpose.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ***** ORIGINAL *****
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > All:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > First I'm sorry for making this so long.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Great deal of difficulty here. The usual parameter of NO static routes
> of
> >> > any kind are in effect.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > R1-->S0------(OSPF 0)------S0<--R2-->E0------(IGRP)------E0<--R3-->E1
> >> >
> >> > Interface Addresses:
> >> > R1/S0: 150.100.4.5/24 OSPF Area 0
> >> > R1/L0: 150.100.5.5/30 OSPF Area 0
> >> > R2/S0: 150.100.4.3/24 OSPF Area 0
> >> > R2/L0: 150.100.5.9/30 OSPF Area 0
> >> > R2/E0: 150.100.128.1/24 IGRP
> >> > R3/E0: 150.100.128.2/24 IGRP
> >> > R3/E1: 150.100.129.1/24 IGRP
> >> >
> >> > Problem: How do I distribute OSPF into IGRP on R2? I have configured
> but I
> >> > am unable to get any 150.100.5.x addresses to show up in R3's routing
> table.
> >> > Below are the relevant Configs.
> >> >
> >> > Router 1:
> >> >
> >> > router ospf 5
> >> > network 150.100.4.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> >> > network 150.100.5.5 0.0.0.0 area 0
> >> > network 150.100.14.0 0.0.0.255 area 3
> >> > area 0 authentication message-digest
> >> > area 3 range 150.100.14.0 255.255.255.0
> >> > area 3 virtual-link 150.100.3.1
> >> >
> >> > Router 2:
> >> >
> >> > router ospf 5
> >> > summary-address 150.100.5.0 255.255.255.0
> >> > redistribute igrp 5 subnets route-map igrpn2ospf
> >> > network 150.100.4.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> >> > network 150.100.5.9 0.0.0.0 area 0
> >> > area 0 authentication message-digest
> >> > area 0 range 150.100.4.0 255.255.255.0
> >> > area 0 range 150.100.5.0 255.255.255.0
> >> >
> >> > router igrp 5
> >> > redistribute ospf 5 metric 10000 10 255 1 1500 route-map ospfn2igrp
> >> > passive-interface Loopback0
> >> > passive-interface Serial0
> >> > passive-interface Serial0.110
> >> > network 150.100.0.0
> >> > network 0.0.0.0
> >> >
> >> > ip classless
> >> >
> >> > access-list 1 permit 150.100.128.0 0.0.127.255
> >> > access-list 2 deny 150.100.128.0 0.0.127.255
> >> > access-list 2 permit any
> >> > !
> >> > route-map igrpn2ospf permit 10
> >> > match ip address 1
> >> > !
> >> > route-map ospfn2igrp permit 10
> >> > match ip address 2
> >> >
> >> > Router 3:
> >> >
> >> > router igrp 5
> >> > network 150.100.0.0
> >> >
> >> > ip classless
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ANY help would be appreciated.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> >
> >> > Darrel Hinshaw
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > PS If you have actually read this far . . . THANKS.
> >> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:22:44 GMT-3