From: Jason Gardiner (gardiner@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Nov 07 2001 - 18:35:59 GMT-3
OK, I tried to put this to the test. When I configured networks with a
host mask, they show up in the remote routing table as /32s. In order
for the whole network to show up, I had to redist connected subnets.
There's to many variables in this setup. I prefer using the network
statement with the mask of the interface to be injected. It just works
better for me.
"Larson, Chris (Contractor)" wrote:
>
> Good point. I never really thought about it that way, but your right of
> course. The network statement simply identifies (in the case of OSPF) which
> interfaces to advertise out of and therefore a host route would work.
>
> Thinking about it like that, I cannot really think of any instances where
> you would not want to , or could not simply use a host route. Would everyone
> agree with that????
>
> Are there instances where you could not?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben-Shalom, Omer [mailto:omer.ben-shalom@intel.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 3:00 PM
> To: lgao; Courtney Foster
> Cc: Dennis #6; CCIE Groupstudy
> Subject: RE: CCBootCamp 5 OSPF over frame question
>
> The OSPF network statement really has nothing to do with networks it is an
> access list (and that is why it uses the mask the way it does) to filter the
> interfaces to take part in OSPF, you COULD use the right network mask for
> the interfaces or not, that is really a style issue.
> A while back I asked the same thing stating that I personally prefer the
> network mask to a host mask but later was convinced by a number of good
> people that unless you have a big router with many interfaces using the host
> mask is cleaner and less prone to mistakes and surprises so I am now using a
> host mask.
>
> Again - both will work and this is really a style issue nothing more.
>
> Omer.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lgao [mailto:lgao@cisco.com]
> Sent: Wed, November 07, 2001 7:57 PM
> To: Courtney Foster
> Cc: Dennis #6; CCIE Groupstudy
> Subject: Re: CCBootCamp 5 OSPF over frame question
>
> 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
-- Thanks,Jason Gardiner Supervisor, Engineering Services Sprint <Insert Division Name>
"You can swim all day in the Sea of Knowledge and still come out completely dry. Most people do."
- Norton Juster
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 21 2002 - 06:45:08 GMT-3