From: Ilya Mazhara (willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed May 23 2001 - 08:15:52 GMT-3
If you plaing this game u can create routing loop on other routers.
With single area ASBR u may ask proctor to create additional area on
additional loopback
and type area range backbone_net/wished_mask_for_stupid_FLSM_RP. It'll
work without 2nd ospf process.
Devender Singh wrote:
> This my understanding:
>
> Normally summary-address used create a summary from type 5 LSA on ASBR (Say
> rip to ospf ). But what happens when we use it to summarise the other way
> around. When we redistribute ospf into say RIP, by rules it will get
> redistributed into RIP, but if the mask on the outgoing RIP interface does
> not match routes will not be progated into rip. The mask on the outgoing
> interface does not have anything to do with basic process of redistribution.
> Now if we redistribute RIP back into ospf without any route-map or
> distribute-lists all this route will be inserted back into ospf but they
> will not bother ospf because internal routes have preference over external
> routes. Now the summary command ( our hack) does its job and pushes it back
> to RIP with the mask we want also into ospf domain as external. Rest
> everything is normal.
>
> Does this make sense to you.
>
> Best regards
>
> Devender Singh
> BE(Hons), CCNP
> IP Solution Specialist
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mohamed Heeba [mailto:MAHeeba@itqan.co.ae]
> Sent: Saturday, 12 May 2001 9:04
> To: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> Subject: OSPF summary and redistribution
>
> guys ;
> i have reached a conculation about the problem of the OSPF and summarization
> /redistribution and wanted to share it with you who are interested .
> i have revised Doyles chapter of redistribution ,there is an example of
> redistributing RIP into IS-IS and at the end of this chapter ,(RIP is /24
> and ISIS is /24 and /28 )
> CLEARLY ,he NEVER use the command summary-address to summarize the ISIS
> routes to the RIP and clearly also mentioned that ISIS /28 routes should be
> summarized to RIP by using STATIC ROUTES !!!!.
> so the point is the summary command should only be used to summarize
> extrenal routes INTO ISIS or OSPF .but our problem is that we were trying to
> go around this problem to avoid the use of static routes ,while in fact it
> is an easy way to solve this problem.
> going around the problem can may be done by a command like ip
> default-network ,but this will require the major class network to be
> different in both domains.
> well...i guess in the real lab there should be way to avoid using the
> summary address in opposite way and create more problems ....or they may
> allow to use just single static route somewhere :))))))
>
> hope someone can comment on this
> Mohamed
> **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 - 10:30:49 GMT-3