From: Ajaz Nawaz (anawaz@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Nov 02 2001 - 18:47:30 GMT-3
boot down your routers. Boot up the preferred DR first - presumably the hub.
Then boot the spokes in whichever order you wish.
But before you do this go into the interfaces on your spoke routers that are
participating in the same area and add ip ospf priority 0
look forward to the results :)
jaz
-----Original Message-----
From: fwells12 [mailto:fwells12@hotmail.com]
Sent: 02 November 2001 21:38
To: Kirby, Ron; 'Ajaz Nawaz'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: OSPF over NBMA
Reboot the routers...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kirby, Ron" <Ron.Kirby@getronics.com>
To: "'Ajaz Nawaz'" <anawaz@cisco.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 12:58 PM
Subject: RE: OSPF over NBMA
> Interestingly, after reviewing the "sh ip ospf int" (shown below) I found
> that R3 and R4 both thought they were the DR and R1 was the BDR for both.
I
> checked the routing tables, R3 has no info on loopbacks on r1 and r4. I
> also checked the Linkstate database and found that 3 didn't have some of
the
> links from 4. My conclusion is that R1 is taking updates from R4, and in
> keeping with the DR/BDR scheme, not sending them to R3, but expecting R4
to
> send updates to R3. Now this adds to the problem, as I have set up a
simple
> hub and spoke, and by expecting the neighbor command to work as Doyle
> explained, I should have seen the hub become the DR, because the default
> priority is zero for the spokes. While working on this, I explicitly set
> the priority to zero and reset the interface, R4 came up as the DR and the
> config showed the priorities set to 1. Is this a bug? Do I need the
> neighbor command on the spokes with a priority set to something higher
than
> the defaults to ensure the hub becomes the DR?
>
>
> r1#sh ip ospf int s0/0 (3620 with c3620-ds-mz.121-5.T9.bin)
> Serial0/0 is up, line protocol is up
> Internet Address 134.5.20.1/28, Area 0
> Process ID 1, Router ID 134.5.1.1, Network Type NON_BROADCAST, Cost: 48
> Transmit Delay is 1 sec, State BDR, Priority 1
> Designated Router (ID) 134.5.4.4, Interface address 134.5.20.4
> Backup Designated router (ID) 134.5.1.1, Interface address 134.5.20.1
> Timer intervals configured, Hello 30, Dead 120, Wait 120, Retransmit 5
> Hello due in 00:00:28
> Index 2/2, flood queue length 0
> Next 0x0(0)/0x0(0)
> Last flood scan length is 0, maximum is 1
> Last flood scan time is 0 msec, maximum is 0 msec
> Neighbor Count is 2, Adjacent neighbor count is 2
> Adjacent with neighbor 134.5.4.4 (Designated Router)
> Adjacent with neighbor 134.5.3.3
> Suppress hello for 0 neighbor(s)
>
>
> R3#sh ip ospf int s0 (2501 with c2500-d-l.120-18.bin)
> Serial0 is up, line protocol is up
> Internet Address 134.5.20.3/28, Area 0
> Process ID 1, Router ID 134.5.3.3, Network Type NON_BROADCAST, Cost: 64
> Transmit Delay is 1 sec, State DR, Priority 1
> Designated Router (ID) 134.5.3.3, Interface address 134.5.20.3
> Backup Designated router (ID) 134.5.1.1, Interface address 134.5.20.1
> Timer intervals configured, Hello 30, Dead 120, Wait 120, Retransmit 5
> Hello due in 00:00:03
> Neighbor Count is 1, Adjacent neighbor count is 1
> Adjacent with neighbor 134.5.1.1 (Backup Designated Router)
> Suppress hello for 0 neighbor(s)
>
> r4#sh ip ospf int s0 (2501 with c2500-d-l.120-18.bin)
> Serial0 is up, line protocol is up
> Internet Address 134.5.20.4/28, Area 0
> Process ID 1, Router ID 134.5.4.4, Network Type NON_BROADCAST, Cost: 64
> Transmit Delay is 1 sec, State DR, Priority 1
> Designated Router (ID) 134.5.4.4, Interface address 134.5.20.4
> Backup Designated router (ID) 134.5.1.1, Interface address 134.5.20.1
> Timer intervals configured, Hello 30, Dead 120, Wait 120, Retransmit 5
> Hello due in 00:00:05
> Neighbor Count is 1, Adjacent neighbor count is 1
> Adjacent with neighbor 134.5.1.1 (Backup Designated Router)
> Suppress hello for 0 neighbor(s)
>
> 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: Ajaz Nawaz [mailto:anawaz@cisco.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 1:22 PM
> To: Kirby, Ron; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: OSPF over NBMA
>
>
> please mail us the output from show ip ospf interface from the hub and the
> spokes.
>
> tia
> jaz
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> Kirby, Ron
> Sent: 02 November 2001 18:43
> To: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> Subject: OSPF over NBMA
>
>
> In his book, IP routing V.I, Doyle says (pg 558):
>
> "The neighbor command configures...with address..of its three neighbors.
> The default priority is zero; by not changing the default...none of its
> neighbors is eligible to become the DR or BDR."
>
> I'm running a multipoint subinterface (R1 hub) to two physical serial
frame
> interfaces utilizing the neighbor command on the hub. With 12.1-5T code,
> the router automatically added a priority to one of my neighbor
statements:
>
> R1:
> router ospf 1
> network 134.5.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> network 134.5.20.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> neighbor 134.5.20.3 priority 1 <--- added by IOS
> neighbor 134.5.20.4
> !
>
> And then the highest IP loopback became the DR after the 3.3 router was
the
> DR:
>
> r1#sh ip ospf nei
> Neighbor ID Pri State Dead Time Address
Interface
> 134.5.3.3 1 FULL/DR 00:01:44 134.5.20.3
> Serial0/0.2
> N/A 0 ATTEMPT/DROTHER 00:01:14 134.5.20.4
> Serial0/0.2
> 1w0d: %OSPF-5-ADJCHG: Process 1, Nbr 134.5.4.4 on Serial0/0.2 from LOADING
> to FULL, Loading r1#sh ip ospf nei
> Neighbor ID Pri State Dead Time Address
Interface
> 134.5.3.3 1 FULL/DROTHER 00:01:57 134.5.20.3
> Serial0/0.2
> 134.5.4.4 1 FULL/DR 00:01:57 134.5.20.4
> Serial0/0.2
>
>
> And then the router added the priority to the second neighbor statement:
>
> R1:
> router ospf 1
> network 134.5.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> network 134.5.20.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> neighbor 134.5.20.3 priority 1 <--added by IOS
> neighbor 134.5.20.4 priority 1 <--added by IOS
>
> Doyle's next paragraph states that, in his example, the spoke routers were
> configured with the IP address of the hub with a priority of 10, "which
> means.....will become the DR." Well, didn't the use of the neighbor
> statement with a default priority of zero ensure that the hub router would
> become the DR? I found this exact behavior when I used physical
interfaces
> all around. So I ruled out differences of physical interfaces compared to
> subinterfaces. Am I missing something?
>
> Thanks
> 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: Dennis Laganiere [mailto:dennisl@advancedbionics.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2001 11:37 AM
> To: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> Subject: Redistribution matrix
>
>
> I've sent out almost 100 copies of what we have so far. The e-mails were
> coming fast and furious, so if you still want a copy or if I missed you,
> please send me an e-mail. This is a slightly different version then I
sent
> yesterday. I tried to incorporate Eric's excellent thoughts (EA Louie).
>
> If even a portion of the people I sent it to feel like contributing, we
> should be able to put together an excellent guide to redistribution that
we
> can all use to study from. If you do send me any changes or additions,
> please use a different colored text so I can easily identify the changes.
> Here's what I would like to accomplish:
> * What I was trying to put together was something easy to
> navigate that would have a sample configuration and a list of the issues
for
> each possible redistribution.
> * I would like to keep the document "open" so people can
> adapted it to their own study style. I used an MS Word document, but if
you
> want something else, let me know.
> * I'd like to keep it simple enough that even someone of my
> limited intelligence could figure out what's going on.
> Let me know your thoughts...
> --- Dennis
>
> <<Redistribution Matrix.doc>>
>
> [GroupStudy.com removed an attachment of type application/msword which had
a
> name of Redistribution Matrix.doc]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 21 2002 - 06:45:02 GMT-3