From: Atif Awan (atifawan@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Oct 23 2000 - 01:34:52 GMT-3
This is probably because the optimal path to reach 192.168.1.0 is still
through serial 0 link. Also IGRP uses the smallest bandwidth in the path to
the destination to calculate the metric and most probably the change you
have brought about in the bandwidth is not enough to change the minimal
bandwidth.
Regards
Atif Awan
>From: Jansen <jysh@teamsun.com.cn>
>Reply-To: Jansen <jysh@teamsun.com.cn>
>To: "ccielab@groupstudy.com" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: IGRP route metric recalculate question, Pls.
>Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:58:44 +0800
>
>Hi,all
> I got this route table when igrp is configured.
>r3#sh ip ro ig
>I 1.0.0.0/8 [100/8976] via 192.169.1.1, 00:00:02, Serial0
>I 2.0.0.0/8 [100/1600] via 135.1.23.2, 00:00:02, Ethernet0
>I 5.0.0.0/8 [100/9076] via 192.169.1.1, 00:00:02, Serial0
>I 192.168.1.0/24 [100/160350] via 192.169.1.1, 00:00:02, Serial0
>I 172.16.0.0/16 [100/8576] via 192.169.1.1, 00:00:02, Serial0
>
>when i change the bandwidth of s0 to 100k,the route table looked like this,
>
>r3#sh ip ro ig
>I 1.0.0.0/8 [100/9076] via 135.1.23.2, 00:00:05, Ethernet0
>I 2.0.0.0/8 [100/1600] via 135.1.23.2, 00:00:05, Ethernet0
>I 5.0.0.0/8 [100/9176] via 135.1.23.2, 00:00:05, Ethernet0
>I 192.168.1.0/24 [100/160350] via 192.169.1.1, 00:00:08, Serial0
>I 172.16.0.0/16 [100/8676] via 135.1.23.2, 00:00:05, Ethernet0
>
>so from this table i found that only the route metric of 192.168.1.0/24 is
>not
>recalculated, but why?
>
>Any suggestion is prefered.
>
>Best Regards
>
> Jansen
> 00-10-23
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:25:29 GMT-3