From: SFeldberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed Dec 05 2001 - 12:50:23 GMT-3
I just configured this scenario and found the same results. I then looked
at it closer and the answer is now a little more obvious.
Before:
r2#sh ip eig top
IP-EIGRP Topology Table for AS(100)/ID(199.5.211.2)
Codes: P - Passive, A - Active, U - Update, Q - Query, R - Reply,
r - reply Status, s - sia Status
P 199.5.211.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 2169856
via Connected, Serial0.1
P 199.5.211.7/32, 0 successors, FD is Inaccessible
via 199.5.211.1 (26137600/25625600), Serial0.1
P 133.5.1.0/24, 0 successors, FD is Inaccessible
via 199.5.211.1 (26137600/25625600), Serial0.1
Experiment - I added a network to R1 - 166.5.1.0 /24, and included it in
EIGRP
r1#sh ip route
1.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C 1.1.1.1 is directly connected, Loopback0
199.5.211.0/24 is variably subnetted, 2 subnets, 2 masks
C 199.5.211.0/24 is directly connected, Serial0.1
O 199.5.211.7/32 [110/64] via 199.5.211.7, 01:32:42, Serial0.1
166.5.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C 166.5.1.0 is directly connected, Ethernet0
133.5.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
O 133.5.1.0 [110/74] via 199.5.211.7, 01:32:42, Serial0.1
r1#sh ip eig top
IP-EIGRP Topology Table for AS(100)/ID(1.1.1.1)
Codes: P - Passive, A - Active, U - Update, Q - Query, R - Reply,
r - reply Status, s - sia Status
P 199.5.211.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 2169856
via Connected, Serial0.1
P 199.5.211.7/32, 1 successors, FD is 25625600
via Redistributed (25625600/0)
P 133.5.1.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 25625600
via Redistributed (25625600/0)
P 166.5.1.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 281600
via Connected, Ethernet0
r1#
This is how it is seen on R2
r2#sh ip route
199.5.211.0/24 is variably subnetted, 2 subnets, 2 masks
O 199.5.211.1/32 [110/64] via 199.5.211.1, 01:30:51, Serial0.1
C 199.5.211.0/24 is directly connected, Serial0.1
166.5.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
D 166.5.1.0 [90/2195456] via 199.5.211.1, 00:02:44, Serial0.1
133.5.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C 133.5.1.0 is directly connected, Ethernet0
r2#sh ip eig top
IP-EIGRP Topology Table for AS(100)/ID(199.5.211.2)
Codes: P - Passive, A - Active, U - Update, Q - Query, R - Reply,
r - reply Status, s - sia Status
P 199.5.211.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 2169856
via Connected, Serial0.1
P 199.5.211.7/32, 0 successors, FD is Inaccessible
via 199.5.211.1 (26137600/25625600), Serial0.1
P 133.5.1.0/24, 0 successors, FD is Inaccessible
via 199.5.211.1 (26137600/25625600), Serial0.1
P 166.5.1.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 2195456
via 199.5.211.1 (2195456/281600), Serial0.1
r2#
Notice that there is a successor, and a feasible distance. Now, the same
topology, but the route is included in OSPF area 0 instead of EIGRP
r1#sh ip route
1.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C 1.1.1.1 is directly connected, Loopback0
199.5.211.0/24 is variably subnetted, 2 subnets, 2 masks
C 199.5.211.0/24 is directly connected, Serial0.1
O 199.5.211.7/32 [110/64] via 199.5.211.7, 01:35:43, Serial0.1
166.5.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C 166.5.1.0 is directly connected, Ethernet0
133.5.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
O 133.5.1.0 [110/74] via 199.5.211.7, 01:35:43, Serial0.1
r1#sh ip eig top
IP-EIGRP Topology Table for AS(100)/ID(1.1.1.1)
Codes: P - Passive, A - Active, U - Update, Q - Query, R - Reply,
r - reply Status, s - sia Status
P 199.5.211.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 2169856
via Connected, Serial0.1
P 199.5.211.7/32, 1 successors, FD is 25625600
via Redistributed (25625600/0)
P 133.5.1.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 25625600
via Redistributed (25625600/0)
P 166.5.1.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 25625600
via Redistributed (25625600/0)
r2#sh ip route
199.5.211.0/24 is variably subnetted, 2 subnets, 2 masks
O 199.5.211.1/32 [110/64] via 199.5.211.1, 00:00:09, Serial0.1
C 199.5.211.0/24 is directly connected, Serial0.1
166.5.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
O 166.5.1.0 [110/74] via 199.5.211.1, 00:00:09, Serial0.1
133.5.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C 133.5.1.0 is directly connected, Ethernet0
r2#sh ip eig top
IP-EIGRP Topology Table for AS(100)/ID(199.5.211.2)
Codes: P - Passive, A - Active, U - Update, Q - Query, R - Reply,
r - reply Status, s - sia Status
P 199.5.211.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 2169856
via Connected, Serial0.1
P 199.5.211.7/32, 0 successors, FD is Inaccessible
via 199.5.211.1 (26137600/25625600), Serial0.1
P 133.5.1.0/24, 0 successors, FD is Inaccessible
via 199.5.211.1 (26137600/25625600), Serial0.1
P 166.5.1.0/24, 0 successors, FD is Inaccessible
via 199.5.211.1 (26137600/25625600), Serial0.1
r2#
Review EIGRP terminology:
Feasible Distance - equal to the sum of costs to reach network A.B.C.D
Successor - Forwarding path to network A.B.C.D, path cost equal to FD
Feasible Successor - an alternate (EIGRP) path to network A.B.C.D
During redistribution, there is no EIGRP successor for the route. No
Successor = no feasible distance. No feasible distance = successor
inaccessible. This makes more sense to me now, any thoughts?
Steve
"Mas Kato"
<loomis_towcar@speed To: jianxin.liu@invisix.com
racer.com> cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com,
sfeldberg@edeltacom.com
Sent by: Subject: RE: why no FD in ei
grp
nobody@groupstudy.co
m
12/05/2001 02:34 AM
Please respond to
"Mas Kato"
[demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text]
Jianxin,
When the 10-networks are redistributed from OSPF into EIGRP on R1 they will
be advertised to R2 as EIGRP-external routes, so their administrative
distance at R2 will be 170--less favorable than the way the routes are
known via OSPF internally to R2. Perhaps setting the FD to inaccessable is
an artifact of the router's selection process.
Try changing the AD for EIGRP-external routes on R2 to something less than
110 and see if that accomplishes what you want.
Regards,
Mas Kato
https://ecardfile.com/id/mkato
> Liu Jianxin-qch1927 <Jianxin.Liu@invisix.com> SFeldberg@edeltacom.com,
Mas Kato <loomis_towcar@speedracer.com> RE: why no FD in eigrpDate: Wed, 5
Dec 2001 10:32:22 +0800
>
>Thanks all,
>
>Here is the configuration for R1
>router eigrp 100
> redistribute ospf 1
> network 199.5.211.0
> default-metric 100 100 255 1 1500
>!
>router ospf 1
> network 199.5.211.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
>
>Here is the configuration for R2
>router eigrp 100
> network 199.5.211.0
>!
>router ospf 1
> network 133.5.1.1 0.0.0.0 area 0
> network 199.5.211.7 0.0.0.0 area 0
>
>
>Please notes that both R1 and R2 run OSPF and eigrp. But I only
redistribute ospf into eigrp on R1.
>
>And I have default metric in eigrp for redistribution.
>
>I think maybe I also need redistribute ospf to eigrp on R2. But my
questions is: Must I do so to solve the problem?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jianxin
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: SFeldberg@edeltacom.com [mailto:SFeldberg@edeltacom.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 4:26 AM
>To: Mas Kato
>Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com; nobody@groupstudy.com; Jianxin.Liu
>Subject: Re: why no FD in eigrp
>
>
>I was thinking that too at first. I perceived that value as the metric to
>reach the advertising host (199.5.211.8), who's network was included in
the
>EIGRP routing process. Jianxin - let's see some configs.
>
>Steve
>sfeldberg@edeltacom.com
>
>
>
> "Mas Kato"
> <loomis_towcar@speed To:
sfeldberg@edeltacom.com
> racer.com> cc:
ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Sent by: Subject: Re: why no FD
in eigrp
> nobody@groupstudy.co
> m
>
>
> 12/04/2001 03:16 PM
> Please respond to
> "Mas Kato"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>[demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text]
>Steve,
>
>You're probably right, but I can't help but wonder how EIGRP is
calculating
>the first term in: (25651200/25625600), which is supposed to be the (total
>cost to the advertised route/cost to the neighbor advertising the
route)...
>
>Regards,
>
>Mas Kato
>https://ecardfile.com/id/mkato
>
>> SFeldberg@edeltacom.com Re: why no FD in eigrp Liu Jianxin-qch1927
><Jianxin.Liu@invisix.com>Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com, nobody@groupstudy.com
>>Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:40:11 -0500
>>Reply-To: SFeldberg@edeltacom.com
>>
>>No way for EIGRP to calculate a metric for the OSPF routes. No metric =
>>infinity = inaccessible. Remember that IGRP/EIGRP require the
application
>>of 5 metric values during redistribution, or to have a default-metric
>>applied to the routing process in config-router mode.
>>
>>Steve
>>
>>
>>
>
>> Liu
>
>> Jianxin-qch1927 To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>
>> <Jianxin.Liu@in cc:
>
>> visix.com> Subject: why no FD in eigrp
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Group,
>>
>>I use a simple topology as follow:
>>
>> R1 R2
>> | |
>>------------------------- LAN
>>|
>>R3
>>
>>
>>R1 and R2, R3 run OSPF on their ethernet interface.
>>
>>R1 and R2 also run eigrp on the Etherent interface.
>>
>>Then I redistribute OSPF into eigrp on R1 and hope to see these routes on
>>R2's routing table.
>>But I only saw the OSPF route on R2.
>>
>>R2#show ip route
>>O IA 10.32.4.32/27 [110/11] via 199.5.211.60, 00:06:21, Ethernet0
>>O IA 10.32.5.32/27 [110/12] via 199.5.211.50, 00:06:21, Ethernet0
>> [110/12] via 199.5.211.51, 00:06:21, Ethernet0
>>
>>
>>R2#show ip eigrp top
>>P 10.32.4.32/27, 0 successors, FD is Inaccessible
>> via 199.5.211.8 (25651200/25625600), Ethernet0
>>P 10.32.5.32/27, 0 successors, FD is Inaccessible
>> via 199.5.211.8 (25651200/25625600), Ethernet0
>>
>>Notes the FD in the eigrp is inaccessible here. So I think this is the
>>reason why the eigrp route can
>>not insert into the routing table. But I do not know why FD inaccessible?
>>
>>Can anyone help?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Jianxin
>------------------------------------------------------------
>Speed Racer's Official Virtual Pit Stop.
>http://www.speedracerdsl.com/speedracer/
------------------------------------------------------------
Speed Racer's Official Virtual Pit Stop.
http://www.speedracerdsl.com/speedracer/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:32:38 GMT-3