From: Ilya Mazhara (willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Jan 24 2001 - 05:22:12 GMT-3
Hi!
See inline..
"Connary, Julie Ann" wrote:
>
> huh? do not understand your message - please clarify
>
> the point is to redistribute igrp into ospf and ospf into igrp.
>
> At 06:17 PM 1/23/2001 +0300, you wrote:
>
> >"Connary, Julie Ann" wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I ran across a practice lab and another fat-kid lab that use the ospf
> > > summary-address to overcome
> > > vlsm to fsm issues when redistributing ospf into igrp:
> > >
> > > situation: The ospf connected interface has a longer mask than the IGRP
> > > connected interface.
> > > area-range does not work because it is on the same router
.
Yes, but actual job R5 doing as ABR (area range 170.10.128/24) not R4
with its summary etc. This summary doesnt mean anything (of cause if ip
split is enabled in IGRP network). If you look at ip ospf database
you should see 170.10.128 as IA summary but its not external.
> > >
> > > The Fatkid lab - expert redistribution - solves this with a
> > summary-address.
> > >
> > > Question - does this not inject E2 routes back into your OSPF domain?
Yes, if there's no routing loops. But you can configure sucessful ASBR
summarization if summary adress (170.10/16 for example) include network
in external (RIP, IGRP..) routing domains.
If you want explicit control of mutual redistributions just use
route-maps or distribute-lists.
> >no red igrp # give your right answer
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Julie Ann Connary
> | | Network Consulting Engineer
> ||| ||| Federal Support Program
> .|||||. .|||||. 13635 Dulles Technology Drive,
> Herndon VA 20171
> .:|||||||||:.:|||||||||:. Pager: 1-888-642-0551
> c i s c o S y s t e m s Email: jconnary@cisco.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:42 GMT-3