From: Stephen Oliver (stevie_oliver@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Nov 01 2001 - 15:06:28 GMT-3
You do the Area range command on the ABR NOT the ASBR.
Stevie.
p.s. My ASBR was running 12.1(3) and summary-address does not work.
>From: Ademola Osindero <osindero@lagos.sns.slb.com>
>To: "Stephen Oliver" <stevie_oliver@hotmail.com>,ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: RE: OSPF-IGRP redistribution
>Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 17:37:37 +0100
>
>Stevie,
>
>I am running IOS 12.0(19).
>
>I posted my request because summary-address didn't work earlier on. But I
>did it again and it did work.
>Area range on the ASBR (where I want to redistribute) does not create
>summary addresses that can be redistributed into IGRP but only sends them
>to other ospf routers.
>
>Ademola
>
>
>At 03:35 PM 11/1/2001 +0000, Stephen Oliver wrote:
>
>>Be careful, which IOS was your ASBR running ?
>>
>>I investigated this recently and summary-address does not work on my 12.1
>>ASBR but did on an 11.0 ASBR.
>>
>>The area range command on the ABR should work. You should see an
>>appropriate summary on the ASBR that you can then redistribute.
>>
>>E.g If your IA routes came from area 1 on the ABR
>>
>># area 1 range 17.59.0.0 255.255.0.0
>>
>>Should put a /16 route in the ASBR table.
>>
>>Stevie.
>>
>>
>>>From: Ademola Osindero <osindero@lagos.sns.slb.com>
>>>Reply-To: Ademola Osindero <osindero@lagos.sns.slb.com>
>>>To: "Kirby, Ron" <Ron.Kirby@getronics.com>, ccielab@groupstudy.com
>>>Subject: RE: OSPF-IGRP redistribution
>>>Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2001 15:33:32 +0100
>>>
>>>Ron,
>>>
>>>Thanks for your response.
>>>
>>>I am assuming a real-lab environment where the rule clearly states that
>>>no
>>>static routes of any form can be configured. Using ip default-network
>>>will
>>>definitely create static route entry in the routing table and I would not
>>>want to use that except the proctor give's a nod to it.
>>>Area range would only create a summary that would appear on other ospf
>>>routers (sent in the LSU) but would not appear on the ASBR's routing
>>>table(needed for redistribution). Eventually I got summary-address doing
>>>it
>>>but the lab sample was testing redistribution between different major
>>>networks.
>>>
>>>I summarized on R2 using summary-address 172.17.0.0 and it did work.
>>>
>>>Thanks Ron.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> to nor preparing for my lab and At 08:43 AM 11/1/2001 -0500, Kirby,
>>>Ron
>>>wrote:
>>> >If your only concern is being able to connect to (ping) the OSPF
>>>interfaces
>>> >from the IGRP segments, then Ip default network would provide that
>>>ability.
>>> >There are stipulations on how that should be configured, ie to a
>>>classfull
>>> >network, etc...And possibly where to configure it, for example should
>>>you
>>> >put it on the router doing redistribution or on the next IGRP router...
>>>But
>>> >if you are trying to accomplish this with out any defaults routes in
>>>your
>>> >topology, the "area X range" command under OSPF with the networks in
>>> >question summarized to the mask present on the IGRP interface works as
>>>well.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Ron Kirby
>>> >CCNP, MCSE, CNA
>>> >Network Engineer
>>> >Getronics, Houston ESC
>>> >713-852-5567 / 832-256-5403
>>> >ron.kirby@getronics.com
>>> >
>>> >This e-mail message and any attachments are confidential and may be
>>> >privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify me
>>> >immediately by replying to this message and please destroy all copies
>>>of
>>> >this message and attachments. Thank you.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >-----Original Message-----
>>> >From: Ademola Osindero [mailto:osindero@lagos.sns.slb.com]
>>> >Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 6:22 AM
>>> >To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>>> >Subject: OSPF-IGRP redistribution
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >I don't intend to start a long discussion on this topic but I need your
>>> >help.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >On router R2, I have this routes
>>> >
>>> > 171.68.0.0/26 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>>> >C 171.68.62.64 is directly connected, Serial1
>>> > 172.17.0.0/16 is variably subnetted, 6 subnets, 4 masks
>>> >C 172.17.59.128/30 is directly connected, Ethernet0
>>> >C 172.17.59.192/30 is directly connected, Virtual-TokenRing0
>>> >O IA 172.17.59.0/26 [110/65] via 172.17.59.33, 00:06:21, Serial0
>>> >C 172.17.59.32/28 is directly connected, Serial0
>>> >O 172.17.59.33/32 [110/64] via 172.17.59.33, 00:06:21, Serial0
>>> >O IA 172.17.59.65/32 [110/11] via 172.17.59.130, 00:06:21, Ethernet0
>>> >
>>> >and I intend to redistribute OSPF routes into IGRP running only on
>>> >interface s1 (171.68.62.64).
>>> >
>>> >The major networks are not the same 172.17.0.0 and 171.68.0.0. Can any
>>>one
>>> >suggest how to go about this redistribution without considering an
>>>option
>>> >of static routes?
>>> >
>>> >Thanks
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Osindero Ademola
>>> >Schlumberger Network Solutions
>>> >Tel: 234 1 261 0446 Ext 3227
>>> >Fax 234 1 262 1034
>>> >email:osindero@lagos.sns.slb.com
>>>Osindero Ademola
>>>Schlumberger Network Solutions
>>>Tel: 234 1 261 0446 Ext 3227
>>>Fax 234 1 262 1034
>>>email:osindero@lagos.sns.slb.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 21 2002 - 06:45:00 GMT-3