From: Pablo Thoma (pthoma@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Nov 07 2001 - 15:17:53 GMT-3
Actually many people do just this because it makes reading the config very easy
because you can compare the ip addresses in the network statement to the
ip addresses on the interfaces and there is no risk of missconfiguration
this way.
Of course if you have many interfaces you need in OSPF this might not be a good
solution.
Cheers,
Pablo
At 09:56 7/11/2001 -0800, lgao wrote:
>I don't think it is the best practice to advertise a host mask, it looks
>like a lazy thing that dont' want to figure out what the true mask is.
>
>Courtney Foster wrote:
>
> > It is a host specific mask....because you don't have broadcast...you are
> > telling OSPF that this host is Area 10...At least that's what I think
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dennis #6 [mailto:vacant@home.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 12:04 PM
> > To: CCIE Groupstudy
> > Subject: CCBootCamp 5 OSPF over frame question
> >
> > I noticed on the CCBootCamp lab 5 solution that the wildcard mask on
> > each router for the point-to-multipoint frame connections is 0.0.0.0
> > (see below). Is there a good reason for using this mask as opposed to
> > 0.0.0.255 (it's a /24 subnet)? When is it best to use 0.0.0.0 versus
> > 0.0.0.255. I thought it was normal to use the inverse mask that
> > corresponds to the subnet mask on that interface. What am I missing?
> >
> > router ospf 1
> > redistribute igrp 1 metric 20 metric-type 1 subnets
> > network 172.168.100.5 0.0.0.0 area 10 !point to multipoint frame
> > connection network 137.20.20.0 0.0.0.255 area 0 area 10 virtual-link
> > 172.168.30.97 area 10 virtual-link 172.168.100.6
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Dennis #6
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 21 2002 - 06:45:07 GMT-3