From: Peter Van Oene (pvo@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri May 04 2001 - 10:06:10 GMT-3
Route filtering intra area is just not something that is done in my experience.
It's a nasty practice. Well designed networks will delivery area/domain bord
ers at appropriate spots such that summarization/aggregation/manipulation can t
ake place in a more natural way. Of course, this is the lab list and the lab h
as a tendance to ask you to break from "best-practise" design" :)
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 5/3/2001 at 11:09 AM Frank Jimenez wrote:
>Curtis,
> You can put a *in-bound* distribute list in the router configuration
>section to deny the undesirable route. The unwanted route would still
>appear in the Link-State database, but wouldn't be placed into the routing
>table....
>
> Of course, the bad part about this is that you have to do this on all
>of the routers that don't want to see your route, since the LSAs don't get
>filtered.
>
> Any other ways anybody can think of?
>
>Frank Jimenez, CCIE #5738
>franjime@cisco.com
>
>
>
>At 10:57 AM 05/03/2001 -0400, Curtis Phillips wrote:
>>Hello All,
>>
>>I was curious whether anyone was aware of any means to control
>>a route within a specific area within OPSF. More specifically,
>>if a default-route is configured to a null on an ABR, and originated
>>within OPSF, is there a means to control which area will propogate the
>>route and which area will not? It seems logical that within an area lsa's
>>must be consistent, but if the route were prevented from being inserted
>into an area, then it seems it should work.
>>
>>A distribute-list on an outbound interface is a no-no. (and really do
>address the issue of keeping the orute out of the undesirable area anyway)
>so what are the alternatives?
>>
>>Thanks in advance for any advice.
>>
>>Curtis
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:30:33 GMT-3