From: Justin Menga (Justin.Menga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Dec 10 2000 - 07:36:12 GMT-3
Hi,
I think xianqi is talking about policy routing:
ip local policy route route-map NEXT_HOP
route-map NEXT_HOP permit 10
match interface s0
set next-hop 10.10.1.4
route-map NEXT_HOP permit 20
The above basically says if the next hop interface is out s0, then set the
next hop to be 10.10.1.4 (R4). This applies to traffic originating from the
router....
-----Original Message-----
From: zhangxianqi [mailto:xianqizhang@sina.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2000 4:35 PM
To: Ronnie Royston
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: An equivalent to NEXT_HOP_SELF for an IGP?
you can do it on redistribut use route-map,in the route-map,set next-hop.
I don't try it on my router,just from memory,sorry if i am wrong.
regards
xianqi
----- Original Message -----
From: Ronnie Royston <RonnieR@globaldatasys.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Saturday, December 09, 2000 8:22 AM
Subject: An equivalent to NEXT_HOP_SELF for an IGP?
> Is there a way to redistribute routes between IGPs in such a way as to set
> redistributed routes to point to this router as the next hop?
>
> I set up a lab where a multipoint subinterface is connecting R7 as below:
>
> R3 R4
> \ /
> \ /
> R7
>
> R7 shares OSPF area0 with R3 and speaks RIPv2 to R4 (passive interface
with
> neighbor command). R3 is getting the routes from RIP redistributed just
> fine and as expected, with R4's serial interface as the next hop.
However,
> routing fails because I only have R3 and R4 frame mapped to R7 and not
each
> other. I want to use a route-map in redistributing into OSPF to tell the
> OSPF routers to use R7s serial interface as the next hop for the routes
> learned via RIP. I can't get this to work. How should I resolve this,
or,
> is this a completely useless senario and there are no "knobs" to turn to
fix
> this? Thanks everyone.
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:26:01 GMT-3