From: rsevier (rsevier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Apr 25 2001 - 16:22:40 GMT-3
I do have a virtual link from area 44 to area 0 through area 3 and it is up
on both ends. I did find out (the hard way) that the virtual link needs to
be pointed at the router ID and not the directly connected interface.
-----Original Message-----
From: Johnny Dedon [mailto:johnny.dedon@exodus.net]
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 12:09 PM
To: rsevier; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Bootcamp lab 1
A virtual link is required. Area 44 is not directly connected to area 0.
All inter area connections must be made through area 0.
HTH
Johnny Dedon
Senior Staff Consultant
Exodus Professional Services
johnny.dedon@exodus.net
www.exodus.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "rsevier" <rsevier@zealousolutions.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 1:54 PM
Subject: Bootcamp lab 1
> I am completing bootcamp lab 1 and I have a question R3 and R4. R4's
> loopback interfaces are in area 44 and R4's e0 interface is in area 3. R4
> has a serial link to R3. The serial link from R3 that is connected to R4
is
> in area 3 and R3's other serial interface is in area 0. My question is
why
> can't I see R4's loopback interfaces (that are in area 44) in R3's routing
> table? If I redistribute connected in R4 then I can see them, but they
are
> E2 type routes and that isn't what the lab is looking for. I have set up
> policy routing for everyting to see everything, but shouldn't R3 see R4's
> loopback interfaces? I thought I should see the subnets as IA routes in
> R3's routing table.
>
> l0---- s1 s1 s0
> area 44 > R4 ---------- R3 ---------
> l1---- | area 3 area 0
> |
> e0
> **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:29:56 GMT-3