From: Curtis Phillips (phillipscurtis@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Jan 08 2001 - 18:54:12 GMT-3
I have an interesting question regarding a singular redistribuition point
and the need to use route-map to disallow insertion of a specific network
concerning bootcamp lab #8. Where router R5 is doing redist betw OSPF and IGRP
and the subnet on which the BRI interface is configured is also part
of the major net configured for IGRP. Why is it necessary with a passive
interface for IGRP on the BRI to suppress the redist into the OSPF to keep
the interface down? What does it say about how the protocols interact? Looking
at the frequency with which teh BRI attempts to dial (cause bri IP
--> 224.0.0.5) is it reasonable to assume the route even though it's been
redistributed into OPSF is still atempting to update at interval of teh IGRP?
The specifics of this have puzzled me for a while.
Curtis
"Peter Van Oene" <pvo@usermail.com> wrote:
Hey Chuck,
I can't off top of my head see how you obtain a routing loop in a linear
network. With two points of redistribution (mutual redist if you like), this
becomes a fairly significant issue as I'm sure everyone here knows.
Maybe we're missing something.
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 1/7/2001 at 9:26 PM Chuck Larrieu wrote:
>I just complete a frenetic go-through of the Slattery/Burton book - chapter
>5 - OSPF section
>
>One section touches on redistribution between RIP 2 and OSPF ( although I
>suppose that is not necessarily relevant )
>
>In any case, setup was relatively simple:
>
>OSPF domain------redistribution_router----------RIPv2 domain
>
>Jus to see what happened, I failed to place the distribute-lists as
>recommended. I wanted to see bad thing happen. For the life of my I could
>net get a routing loop to form. I did things like lower the metric of the
>redistributed routes to below that of the native OSPF routes, hoping to see
>the RIP redistribution come into the routing tables of the OSPF routers. No
>dice.
>
>So my question - in a situation like the above, with only a single
>redistribution point, does it matter? Was the issue the particular routing
>protocols? Is the issue of redistribution and loops as a result relevant
>only with multiple redistribution points?
>
>Any thoughts as to why I couldn't cause problems when I tried, even though I
>seem to have no trouble creating problems when I don't try?
>
>Chuck
>----------------------
>I am Locutus, a CCIE Lab Proctor. Xx_Brain_dumps_xX are futile. Your life as
>it has been is over ( if you hope to pass ) From this time forward, you will
>study US!
>( apologies to the folks at Star Trek TNG )
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:24 GMT-3