From: mark salmon (masalmon@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Sep 20 2000 - 20:52:34 GMT-3
I still disagree with the blanket statement about static routes. If you
want to summarize OSPF you have to use static routes (null 0). I still
believe that you can do so as long as you are using summarization.
One method that is recommended by Caslow is to use a static route to
null 0 with the same mask as the IGRP net.
For example, suppose the masks on the IGRP networks is /24, but it
varies on the OSPF net.
On the ASBR, you can do 172.17.x.0 255.255.255.0 null 0 (be careful
here, if you have a dynamic route for x you will pass packets into a
black hole, the key is to have good network design to prevent this). If
you already have a 172.17.x.0/24 network, then I would create a class c
subnet (e.g. 198.135.244.1/24) on a loopback interface, either
redistribute it into IGRP or advertise it in IGRP. Then make it the
default network for IGRP.
Comments group (Flame jacket on for this).
Mary Weidner wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I am working on a practice lab on one of the midwest channels racks and am ha
ving a problem with redistribution. Here's a sample config:
>
> Router A
> !
> router ospf 100
> network 172.17.59.32 0.0.0.15 area 0
> network 172.17.59.48 0.0.0.15 area 2
> network 172.17.59.64 0.0.0.63 area 3
> redistribute igrp 100 metric 64 subnets
> !
> router igrp 100
> network 172.17.0.0
> redistribute ospf 100 metric 64 10 255 1 1500
>
> Router B
> !
> router igrp 100
> network 172.17.0.0
> !
>
> Here's the deal, IGRP does not understand VLSM which is what is being used on
router A with OSPF. From all the docs I've read, you would have to put in stat
ic routes on Router B to tell it how to get to those other subnets, except I'm
not allowed to use static routes. The subnets in OSPF on Router A are not redis
tributing into IGRP. They come out as 172.17.0.0 instead of whatever the real n
etwork number is.
>
> Here's the other thing I tried; I added these lines:
>
> Router A
> !
> router ospf 100
> default-information originate always
> !
> router igrp 100
> default-information allowed in 1
> default-information allowed out 1
> !
> access-list 1 permit any
>
> Router B
> !
> router igrp 100
> default-information allowed in 1
> !
> access-list 1 permit any
>
> The thinking here was to originate a default route (0.0.0.0) from Router A in
OSPF and try to redistribute this into IGRP..... it didn't work. Maybe I just
configured it wrong or maybe it's just not possible. I don't know. This is the
second time I've attempted to get this working to no avail. Let me know if you
have any ideas.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tony Olzak
>
> BTW-I've just joined the list. I'm scheduled to take the test on Nov 19-20 in
RTP.
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:24:59 GMT-3