From: Jason Gardiner (gardiner@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Sep 07 2001 - 17:27:25 GMT-3
I'll try this, although I don't think it will work. The route is being
heard by R4 as an intra area route, which I believe takes precedence
over an external route.
tom cheung wrote:
>
> I wonder if you can redistribute the /28 subnet as "connected" on r5 so that
> it'll appear on r4 as external route. That way, the /28 external can be
> summarized on r4 using "summary-address".
>
> >From: Jason Gardiner <gardiner@sprint.net>
> >Reply-To: Jason Gardiner <gardiner@sprint.net>
> >To: CCIE <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Subject: OSPF Virtual Link Question
> >Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 09:05:22 -0400
> >
> >I'm finishing up Fatkid 501 expert redistribution and came across an
> >interesting issue.
> >
> >Router 4 and 5 are connected through ethernet in area 2. Router 5 is
> >also connected to area 0. Router 4 is connected to area 3. Obviously
> >the area 3 must use area 2 as transit for the virtual link.
> >
> >It then appears that router 4 is treated as if it's in area 0, as far as
> >I can tell. Router 5 had a connected /28 that I tried to make into a
> >/24 announcement for router 4's redistribution into IGRP and RIP. I
> >used AREA 0 RANGE command. However, it still showed up as a /28 in
> >router 4's routing table. Once I removed the virtual link, the route
> >was announced as a /24.
> >
> >Basically, what I had to end up doing is adding a loopback address on R4
> >from an unused part of the /24 range and summarize. But this solution
> >seems so kludgy. Can anyone else think of another way to do this?
> >
> >--
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Jason Gardiner
> >Supervisor, Engineering Services
> >Sprint E|Solutions
> >
> >"You can swim all day in the Sea of Knowledge and
> >still come out completely dry. Most people do."
> >
> >- Norton Juster
> >**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:32:15 GMT-3