From: Erick B. (erickbe@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri May 11 2001 - 01:44:40 GMT-3
Those routes are directly connected. They are not OSPF
derived routes so there is nothing to summarize under
the OSPF process. The 152.1.x.x interfaces are also
part of IGRP so that may be another issue. You can try
removing those networks from the OSPF process and do a
redist connected to get them then the summarization
should occur. I haven't tried redist w/directly
connected routes to verify behaviors yet.
Erick
--- Ron Carithers <RCARITHERS@edge2net.net> wrote:
> Below is the config from R6. It's supposed to send
> 152.1.1.0/24 and
> 152.1.2.0/24 through IGRP (e1/0) to R8. When I turn
> on IGRP debugs I don't
> see it send the routes. Thanks for any help.
> Ron
>
> service timestamps debug uptime
> no service password-encryption
> no service udp-small-servers
> no service tcp-small-servers
> no cdp run
> !
> hostname R6
> !
> !
> username R1 password 0 cisco
> ip subnet-zero
> isdn switch-type basic-ni1
> !
> interface Loopback0
> ip address 152.1.12.1 255.255.255.0
> !
> interface Ethernet0/0
> ip address 152.1.11.1 255.255.255.0
> !
> interface Serial0/0
> backup delay 5 20
> backup interface BRI1/0
> ip address 152.1.2.130 255.255.255.128
> ip ospf authentication-key cisco1
> !
>
> interface Ethernet1/0
> ip address 152.1.0.1 255.255.255.0
> !
> !
> interface BRI1/0
> ip address 152.1.1.78 255.255.255.252
> encapsulation ppp
> ip ospf demand-circuit
> isdn spid1 5201
> isdn spid2 5202
> dialer map ip 152.1.1.77 name R1 broadcast 8995101
> dialer load-threshold 1 outbound
> dialer-group 1
> no fair-queue
> ppp callback request
> ppp authentication chap
> ppp multilink
> hold-queue 75 in
> !
> router ospf 64
> summary-address 152.12.0.0 255.252.0.0
> summary-address 152.1.1.0 255.255.255.0
> summary-address 152.1.2.0 255.255.255.0
> redistribute igrp 64 metric 1000
> network 152.1.2.128 0.0.0.127 area 1
> network 152.1.1.76 0.0.0.3 area 2
> network 152.1.11.0 0.0.0.255 area 2
> default-information originate always
> distribute-list 1 in Serial0/0
> area 0 authentication message-digest
> area 1 authentication
> area 1 virtual-link 152.1.2.5 message-digest-key 1
> md5 cisco0
> area 2 nssa
> !
> router igrp 64
> redistribute ospf 64 route-map summary
> passive-interface Ethernet0/0
> passive-interface Serial0/0
> passive-interface BRI1/0
> passive-interface Loopback0
> network 152.1.0.0
> default-metric 1500 10 255 255 1500
> distribute-list 3 in Ethernet1/0
> !
> no ip classless
> access-list 1 deny 152.1.1.72
> access-list 1 deny 152.1.1.65
> access-list 1 deny 152.1.1.69
> access-list 1 deny 152.1.1.96 0.0.0.31
> access-list 1 permit any
> access-list 2 permit any
> access-list 3 deny 152.16.0.0
> access-list 3 deny 152.10.0.0
> access-list 3 deny 152.11.0.0
> access-list 3 permit any
> access-list 6 permit 152.1.1.0
> access-list 6 permit 152.1.2.0
> route-map summary permit 10
> match ip address 6
> !
> !
> dialer-list 1 protocol ip list 2
> !
> line con 0
> line aux 0
> line vty 0 4
> login
> !
> end
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: louie kouncar [mailto:lkouncar@UU.NET]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 7:20 PM
> To: 'Ron Carithers'; 'Rob Hopkins'
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: summary-address in ospf and
> redistribution
>
>
> Ron,
>
> I have used this many many times and it works just
> fine, Why don't you post
> your configs so we can take a look?
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Louie J. Kouncar
> TCO3 Senior Data Center Engineer
> UUNET
> W-703-343-6645
> C-703-304-2460
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> Ron Carithers
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 9:50 PM
> To: 'Rob Hopkins'
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: summary-address in ospf and
> redistribution
>
>
> OK, everyone says to use a summary address to
> redistribute a route with the
> correct mask into IGRP. I have never seen this work.
> I am using "CCIE Lab
> Practice Kit" and there is an example of this in one
> of their labs. Using
> their exact configuration IT DOES NOT WORK. Cisco's
> documentation says " For
> OSPF, this command summarizes only routes from other
> routing protocols that
> are being redistributed into OSPF". What am I
> missing? Has this changed in
> different IOS versions?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Hopkins [mailto:rshopkins@earthlink.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 5:11 PM
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: summary-address in ospf and
> redistribution
>
>
> ever notice how the route to NULL stays even after
> you remove the
> summary-address?
> I got a little careless, and created a summary more
> specific than my
> ethernet address subnet,
> so I couldnt even ping anything on local ethernet
> segment, ran a debug icmp
> packets,
>
> IP: s=137.20.64.5 (local), d=137.20.64.6 (Null0),
> len 100, sending.
> IP: s=137.20.64.5 (local), d=137.20.64.6 (Null0),
> len 100, sending.
> IP: s=137.20.64.5 (local), d=137.20.64.6 (Null0),
> len 100, sending.
> IP: s=137.20.64.5 (local), d=137.20.64.6 (Null0),
> len 100, sending.
> IP: s=137.20.64.5 (local), d=137.20.64.6 (Null0),
> len 100, sending.
> Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)
>
> I cleared ip ro to no avail, rebooted the router and
> the null route went
> away,
> coolest thing is it never shows up in the config..
> Have some fun with your
> study parteners next
> time they ask you to break their network...
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rob Hopkins
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 1.6180339887499
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Greg Ferro" <gferro@netstarnetworks.com>
> To: "Connary, Julie Ann" <jconnary@cisco.com>
> Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 10:04 PM
> Subject: Re: summary-address in ospf and
> redistribution
>
>
> > I have been using the ospf summary-address x.x.x.x
> y.y.y.y not-advertise
> or
> > area x range not-advertise which seem to work
> well. (Although I did not
> > expect them to, I will spend more time on this
> later).
> >
> > This result is that the summary does not get
> advertised through the OSPF
> AS
> > but is used in the redistribution to IGRP. I think
> that this is a 12.0
> > command. This would be used when the OSPF masks
> are longer than IGRP
> >
> >
> > At 10:02 AM 24/01/2001 -0500, you wrote:
> > >Nigel,
> > >
> > >I struggled with this too. Here are my secret
> tools for trying to figure
> > >it out:
> > >
> > >1. debug ip igrp events, debug ip igrp
> transactions. Then do a clear ip
> > >ospf redistribution and a clear ip route * and
> watch what
> > >IGRP is sending in it's packets to neighbors.
> > >
> > >2. show ip ospf database and look at the external
> lsa's. This will tell
> you
> > >when you redistribute igrp into ospf if you are
> > >getting any unwanted routes.
> > >
> > >3. If on the same router - then I have found that
> IGRP will automatically
> > >announce any connected interfaces of the
> > >same subnet length and same major network. Your's
> however are of
> different
> > >networks - so summarization or something is
> needed.
> > >
> > >If the routes are in the same major network these
> techniques work:
> > >
> > >4. If the OSPF longer subnet masks are on ABR's
> that are not the
> > >redistribution router - use area x range command.
> > >5. If the OSPF longer subnet mask are on the ASBR
> - i.e. the
> redistributing
> > >router, then you have three choices:
> > > use a summary-address to the
> igrp subnet mask length
> and
> > >then filter it from going back into OSPF as an E2
> route
> > > use a ip route xxxx xxxx to
> null 0 (with a subnet mask
> > >equal to that of your IGRP subnet mask) and
> redistribute static
> > > use a default-route to another
> non-related network.
> > >
> > >But in your case - two different major networks -
> > >
> > > I would think a summary-address to the
> classfull boundary.
> > > Or a default-route to this network at
> the classfull boundary -
> as
> > >it is a different major network.
> > > Or a static-route to the classfull
> boundary to null 0 and then
> > >redistribute static.
> > >
> > >What was the summary-address that you used? Did
> you then do a
> redistribute
> > >ospf 1 metric x x x x under
> > >your igrp process?
> > >
> > >Julie Ann
> > >
> > >
> > >At 07:14 PM 1/23/2001 -0500, you wrote:
> > > >Julie Ann,
> > > > I was working a lab like this
> over the past weekend
> and let
> > > >me say I've still not solved how to get the
> OSPF domain routed into the
> IGRP
> > > >domain. In my case the interface to the IGRP
> domain was given as
> > > >171.68.62.93/26 and all the OSPF connected
> interfaces were assigned
> address
> > > >on the 172.17.59.x subnet making use of address
> with /28 /29 /30
> subnets.
> > > >The lab specified only the use of the
> 172.17.59.x. I tried the
> > > >summary-address and got nothing to work...
> > > >
> > > >I'm still looking for answers.....
> > > >
> > > >Nigel..
> > > >
> > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > >From: Connary, Julie Ann <jconnary@cisco.com>
> > > >To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > >Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 9:37 AM
> > > >Subject: summary-address in ospf and
> redistribution
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > 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.
> > > > >
> > > > > The Fatkid lab - expert redistribution -
> solves this with a
> > > >summary-address.
> > > > >
> > > > > Question - does this not inject E2 routes
> back into your OSPF
> domain?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > OSPF area 2
> > > > > 170.10.128.4 - 255.255.255.192
> > > > > |
> > > > > |
> > > > > |
> > > > > R4 -----------IGRP - 170.10.2.4
> 255.255.255.0
> > > > >
> > > > > To redistribute the ospf interface into IGRP
> a summary-address is
> > > > > used: summary-address 170.10.128.0
> 255.255.255.0
> > > > >
> > > > > But then in the ospf domain you get an E2
> route to 170.10.128.0 in
> your
> > > > > ospf domain.
> > > > >
> > > > > So how do you prevent this E2 route into
> OSPF - can you filter it?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > >
> > > > > remember - no static, no default.
> > > > >
> > > > > Julie Ann
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >
> 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
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
> > >
> >
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
> **Please
> read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
> **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 - 10:30:38 GMT-3