From: Ronnie Royston (RonnieR@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Jan 21 2001 - 16:47:31 GMT-3
Here's an interesting way.
Paige will have under OSPF, a 'redistribute igrp 1 subnets' command to get
the subnets attached to Leonard advertised through the OSPF domain. So,
OSPF routers know how to get to the IGRP subnets.
So that Leonard knows how to get to the OSPF subnets, use policy routing
with the 'local policy' command. Use an extended access list to tell
Leonard that any packets destined for 172.20.113.0/24, and .114.0/24 should
be sent out the interface pointing to Paige.
The ping will work and you won't even see the subnet routes in the routing
table.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tracy Blackmore [mailto:TracyB@TSLAD.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 10:24 AM
To: 'David FAHED'; Mike McSpedon
Cc: fwells12; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: IGRP/OSPF redistribution question.
I have used the summary-address command on an ASBR to summarize routes
learned from another routing protocol. Here's what I pulled from the IOS
12.0 documentation...
Usage Guidelines
Multiple groups of addresses can be summarized for a given level. Routes
learned from other routing protocols can also be summarized. The metric used
to advertise the summary is the smallest metric of all the more specific
routes. This command helps reduce the size of the routing table.
Tracy W. Blackmore
T.S. Lad Consulting
1026 E Stanford Ave.
Gilbert, AZ., 85234
(480)558-0472
-----Original Message-----
From: David FAHED [mailto:dfahed@outremer.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 10:55 AM
To: Mike McSpedon
Cc: fwells12; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: IGRP/OSPF redistribution question.
Hi,
Fisrt if you read my last e-mail you will see I use the area range not on
the
ASBR but on a internal ospf router. Second I think that you don't understand
how
to use the summary-address. The summary-address can't be used on IGRP
process, so
you propose to use on the ospf process. The problem is if you use it on the
ospf
process, it will be useful to summarize IGRP route on the OSPF process. In
this
case we want to do the contrary (OSPF->IGRP).
Mike McSpedon wrote:
> Regarding the first approach - I'd be careful to do that only if the
routes
> in the OSPF domain aren't summarizable into a /24 (e.g., OSPF has a /20
> that needs to be reachable from the IGRP domain). Regarding the second
> approach, since Paige is an ASBR, you'll need to use the "summary-address"
> not the "area-range" command to summarize the /26 and /28 into /24s for
IGRP.
>
> HTH,
> -Mike
>
> At 08:05 AM 1/21/01 -0400, David FAHED wrote:
> >There is two way to do that :
> >1) Create a loopback on Paige for example 10.0.0.1 - Use the default
> >network 10.0.0.0 to announce a default route into igrp process
> >2) All the network with a mask differente to /24 use in the ospf domain
> >have to be announce with /24. You can use an area range with the two
> >route in gibson - for the route 172.20.113.192/26 area x range
> >172.20.113.0 255.255.255.0 -for the route 172.20.114.48/28 area x range
> >172.20.113.0 255.255.255.0 - After doing that you will have only /24
> >network on paige and you can redistribute into IGRP without problem
> >
> >Hope this help!
> >
> >
> >fwells12 wrote:
> >
> > > In Jeff Doyle's example of OSPF/IGRP redistribution on page 710, is =
> > > there any way of letting the IGRP domain be able to ping the VLSM =
> > > networks?
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:37 GMT-3