From: Bob Chahal (bob.chahal@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun May 20 2001 - 14:47:13 GMT-3
Mistake the hub would be the DR. Man am I gonna get flamed :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Chahal" <bob.chahal@ntlworld.com>
To: "Roman Rodichev" <rodic000@hotmail.com>; <jkaberna@netcginc.com>;
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 6:39 PM
Subject: Re: Redistributing OSPF into IGRP - Policy routing
> Roman,
>
> you say..
>
> Now I only have one question to you and Jon Carmichael. Are you saying
that
> > if you couldn't use frame maps on the spokes and could use "ip ospf
> network"
> > statement we would still have a problem?
>
> No you wouldn't have a problem if you used ip ospf network p-t-m of course
> not BUT in the lab you could not use the command SO the default is
> Non-Broadcast. Assuming you put in the relevant ip ospf priority
statements
> and neighbor statements on the Hubs ospf router config. Then all the
routers
> will have all the routes in their routining tables as you would expect.
> Neighbor relationships between the spokes and hub would be where the spoke
> is the DR and everything would look fine. Until you start pinging!
>
> The routing table on the spokes would have next hop ip address for the
other
> spokes advertised routes as the the other spokes frame relay interface ip
> address. To get around this you could do the layer 2 to layer mapping
using
> frame maps BUT you're told you can't do that. So you use policy routing.
>
> That's all this lab is about. If you couldn't use frame maps and you COULD
> use ip ospf network p-t-m, no you're right there is no problem. But you
> can't so there is and the solution is to use policy routing.
>
> That's what I think.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roman Rodichev" <rodic000@hotmail.com>
> To: <jkaberna@netcginc.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 6:11 AM
> Subject: Re: Redistributing OSPF into IGRP - Policy routing
>
>
> > Wow! John, the fact that I'm not ccie yet and that I'm younger than you
> are
> > doesn't give you right to talk to me that way! I wasn't questioning your
> > knowledge and your qualification. I was questioning your reasoning. I
> > realize I ticked you off, and I'm sorry if I did.
> >
> > All I'm saying is that the inability to use "ip ospf network" command
> leads
> > us to using policy routing. That's it! I understand it's not just the
"use
> > of commands" and that there is a theory behind all of this that I'm
> > completely aware of. I want to make the long story short, so we don't go
> too
> > deep into this discussion of OSPF. We should give a chance to other
people
> > to ask more important questions. And why should you care, John? :) You
> > already got the certification. It will be my own fault if I screw it up.
> > Right? And thanks for the insightful "Getting out of Day 1" statement.
> > You'll be surprised... :)
> >
> > Now I only have one question to you and Jon Carmichael. Are you saying
> that
> > if you couldn't use frame maps on the spokes and could use "ip ospf
> network"
> > statement we would still have a problem?
> >
> > This is my last post on this matter
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "John Kaberna" <jkaberna@netcginc.com>
> > >Reply-To: "John Kaberna" <jkaberna@netcginc.com>
> > >To: "Roman Rodichev" <rodic000@hotmail.com>, <Martin.Duggan@ntl.com>,
> > > <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > >Subject: Re: Redistributing OSPF into IGRP - Policy routing
> > >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 21:18:26 -0700
> > >
> > >If you don't want to listen to me and the couple others that have
> responded
> > >good luck getting out of Day 1. But, you are certainly no one to
> question
> > >my knowledge and my qualification. So back up a step. Go do your
> reading.
> > >Then come back and give me my apology.
> > >
> > >If you actually bother to read Lab 1 you will see that Step 11 says
solve
> > >the problem with routing not layer 3 to layer 2 mapping. Hence the
> policy
> > >routing. You clearly don't have lab 1 and the answers in front of you
> nor
> > >do you understand fundamental concepts of OSPF and frame relay.
> > >
> > >John Kaberna
> > >CCIE #7146
> > >NETCG Inc
> > >www.netcginc.com
> > >(415) 750-3800
> > >Fax: 750-3900
> > >
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Roman Rodichev" <rodic000@hotmail.com>
> > >To: <jkaberna@netcginc.com>; <Martin.Duggan@ntl.com>;
> > ><ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > >Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 9:02 PM
> > >Subject: Re: Redistributing OSPF into IGRP - Policy routing
> > >
> > >
> > > > John, you are ccie, aren't you? No offense, but this is like the
> basics
> > >of
> > > > OSPF.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/104/3.html#11.2.1
> > > >
> > > > "OSPF point-to-multipoint works by exchanging additional link-state
> > >updates
> > > > that contain a number of information elements that describe
> connectivity
> > >to
> > > > the neighboring routers."
> > > >
> > > > or here is the quote from the Q&A forum on TAC:
> > > >
> > > > "Configuring nonbroadcast multiaccess networks as either broadcast
> > > > or non-broadcast assumes that there are virtual circuits from every
> > > > router to every router or fully meshed network. This is not true for
> > > > cases where you have cost constraints or when you have only a
> partially
> > > > meshed network. In these cases, you can configure the OSPF network
> type
> > > > as a point-to-multipoint network. Routing between two routers that
are
> > > > not directly connected will occur through a router that has virtual
> > > > circuits to the routers that are not directly connected."
> > > >
> > > > Try using "ip ospf network broadcast" and then "ip ospf network
> > > > point-to-multipoint", and notice the /32 routes. This command is not
> > >just
> > > > about timers. Can some one back me up?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >From: "John Kaberna" <jkaberna@netcginc.com>
> > > > >To: "Roman Rodichev" <rodic000@hotmail.com>,
<Martin.Duggan@ntl.com>,
> > > > ><ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > >Subject: Re: Redistributing OSPF into IGRP - Policy routing
> > > > >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 20:48:59 -0700
> > > > >
> > > > >Sorry Roman but your wrong. The ip ospf network command only sets
> the
> > > > >timers. Go look it up.
> > > > >
> > > > >John Kaberna
> > > > >CCIE #7146
> > > > >NETCG Inc
> > > > >www.netcginc.com
> > > > >(415) 750-3800
> > > > >Fax: 750-3900
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > > >From: "Roman Rodichev" <rodic000@hotmail.com>
> > > > >To: <jkaberna@netcginc.com>; <Martin.Duggan@ntl.com>;
> > > > ><ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > >Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 8:38 PM
> > > > >Subject: Re: Redistributing OSPF into IGRP - Policy routing
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > I think Step 8 (cant use ip ospf network) is solved by policy
> > >routing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Frame maps are not needed for the routing to work, "ip ospf
> network"
> > > > >would
> > > > > > do frame map's job.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >From: "John Kaberna" <jkaberna@netcginc.com>
> > > > > > >To: "Roman Rodichev" <rodic000@hotmail.com>,
> > ><Martin.Duggan@ntl.com>,
> > > > > > ><ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > > > >Subject: Re: Redistributing OSPF into IGRP - Policy routing
> > > > > > >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 20:27:46 -0700
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >I think you are getting step 8 and step 11 confused.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Step 8 (cant used ip ospf network) - solved by used ip ospf
> > > > >hello-interval
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >Step 11 (cant use 2 frame maps on the spokes) - solved by using
> > >policy
> > > > > > >routing
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >John Kaberna
> > > > > > >CCIE #7146
> > > > > > >NETCG Inc
> > > > > > >www.netcginc.com
> > > > > > >(415) 750-3800
> > > > > > >Fax: 750-3900
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > >From: "Roman Rodichev" <rodic000@hotmail.com>
> > > > > > >To: <Martin.Duggan@ntl.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > > > >Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2001 7:51 PM
> > > > > > >Subject: RE: Redistributing OSPF into IGRP - Policy routing
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > People, am I being stupid? I will take a look at that lab on
> > > > >Tuesday.
> > > > >I
> > > > > > > > clearly remember that they explicitly said not to use "ip
ospf
> > > > >network"
> > > > > > > > statement.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yes, you guys are right that we weren't allowed to use
"frame
> > >map"
> > > > > > > > statements on the spokes. And it's ok. That was not the
point
> of
> > >the
> > > > > > >lab.
> > > > > > > > The point was that we couldn't use "ip ospf network
> multipoint"
> > > > > > >statement,
> > > > > > > > which would fix the entire scenario by creating /32 routes
on
> > >the
> > > > >spokes
> > > > > > > > pointing to the hub. So since we couldn't do it, we had to
> > >create
> > > > >policy
> > > > > > > > routing that would send traffic to the hub manually.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Am I right?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >From: Martin Duggan <Martin.Duggan@ntl.com>
> > > > > > > > >Reply-To: Martin Duggan <Martin.Duggan@ntl.com>
> > > > > > > > >To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > > > > > >Subject: RE: Redistributing OSPF into IGRP - Policy routing
> > > > > > > > >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 21:40:14 +0100
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >Hi Roman
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >My understanding of Lab1 was that you policy route as you
are
> > >not
> > > > > > >permitted
> > > > > > > > >to add multiple frame relay map statements from spoke to
> spoke,
> > >you
> > > > > > >policy
> > > > > > > > >route so that the next hop is actually your hub ( when
> > >attempting
> > > > >to
> > > > > > >reach
> > > > > > > > >a
> > > > > > > > >spoke from a spoke )the hub is obviously aware of all
spokes.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >Martin
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >-----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > >From: Roman Rodichev [mailto:rodic000@hotmail.com]
> > > > > > > > >Sent: 19 May 2001 21:13
> > > > > > > > >To: kenyeo@email.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > > > > > >Subject: Re: Redistributing OSPF into IGRP - Policy routing
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >Ken, policy routing should be used when you can't achieve
> > >certain
> > > > >task
> > > > > > >with
> > > > > > > > >the routing protocol you have or WAN technology you are
> using.
> > >And
> > > > >of
> > > > > > > > >course, when you are asked to use it. Let's say you have
> > >multipoint
> > > > > > > > >frame-relay, and you can't use "ip ospf network" statement.
> The
> > > > >only
> > > > > > >way
> > > > > > >to
> > > > > > > > >achieve routing between FR spokes is to use policy-routing.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >by the way, this is from Lab1 of ccbootcamp, so I'm not
> > >violating
> > > > >NDA.
> > > > > > >NDA
> > > > > > > > >is f...ing scary nowadays
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >From: "Ken Yeo" <kenyeo@email.com>
> > > > > > > > > >Reply-To: "Ken Yeo" <kenyeo@email.com>
> > > > > > > > > >To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > > > > > > >Subject: Redistributing OSPF into IGRP - Policy routing
> > > > > > > > > >Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 12:59:50 -0500
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >Is policy routing allowed for the lab?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >The reason I ask is because policy routing essentially
> bypass
> > > > >routing
> > > > > > > > >table
> > > > > > > > > >and it behave like static route, only it depends on
source
> > > > >address
> > > > > > > > >instead
> > > > > > > > > >of destination address.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >Policy routing can solve a lot of problem, especially
> > > > >redistributing
> > > > > > >VLSM
> > > > > > > > > >OSPF routes into IGRP with same major network.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >What is your thought?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >Thanks!
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >Ken Yeo
> > > > > > > > > >**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
> > > > > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:30:46 GMT-3