From: DAN DORTON (DHSTS68@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Feb 08 2002 - 17:50:50 GMT-3
Well, you got one on me anyways...
Actually 4 on me.
The 7317 after your name.
All I managed to come back from San Jose with was a sore bum...
>>> "ssowell@gate.net" <ssowell@gate.net> 02/08/02 02:25PM >>>
Aye Dan, you caught my poor wording. Since I'm 4 hours outta my time
zone, can I use the jet lag excuse?
I was just trying to steer him away from "area x range" command. Good
point, and thanks for the heads up!
Steven Sowell
CCIE#7317
Original Message:
-----------------
From: DAN DORTON DHSTS68@dhs.state.il.us
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2002 12:41:27 -0600
To: parry.chua@compaq.com, ssowell@gate.net, ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: RE: RE: solie skinet lab - and the old topic ospf-igrp
Why MUST you configure a second OSPF process?
Seems to me you can create some loopbacks & redistribute connected &
accomplish the same thing. IE 165.10.11.129/25 Summary-Address
165.10.11.9/24.
Also seems you could build some tunnels, or add some secondaries to
IGRP to do the job.
Things that make you go Hmmmmm.
>>> "ssowell@gate.net" <ssowell@gate.net> 02/08/02 12:20PM >>>
While it is true that area range will work on ABR, there is no ABR in
this scenario. All routers are in area 0, except the "router B". This
is
why you must create a second OSPF process to pull off the
summarization
with summary-address command.
Cheers,
Steven Sowell
CCIE#7317
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Chua, Parry Parry.Chua@compaq.com
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 11:29:51 +0800
To: ssowell@gate.net, ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: RE: solie skinet lab - and the old topic ospf-igrp
Hello Lupi,
Area range will work on ABR.
Parry Chua
-----Original Message-----
From: ssowell@gate.net [mailto:ssowell@gate.net]
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 10:59 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: RE: solie skinet lab - and the old topic ospf-igrp
I recreated your scenario on my lab rack with similar results. The
difference you seem to be noticing is that the ".11" network is
directly
connected, while the ".185" network is learned about via OSPF.
If you'd like to see the configs of my working solution, lemme know
and
I'll send 'em to you.
Regards,
Steven Sowell
CCIE#7137
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Lupi, Guy Guy.Lupi@eurekaggn.com
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2002 19:52:00 -0500
To: jbanner@cisco.com, rodrigo.silva@cpm.com.br, ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: solie skinet lab - and the old topic ospf-igrp
Ok, I see that this works, but I am having trouble understanding why.
Could
someone explain this to me with a little detail. Lets say I have the
following:
OSPF Area 0
165.10.11.0/25
|
|
RouterA------IGRP 165.10.26.0/24-------RouterB
|
|
|
OSPF Area 0
165.10.7.0/24
|
| OSPF Area 0
RouterC--------165.10.185.0/26
All interfaces are in OSPF area 0 except for the one to Router B, so
Router
A gets the routes for everything, Router B is restricted to /24's
within
the
165.10.0.0 network. I can do a summary address 165.10.11.0/24 under
the
original OSPF process and Router B gets it, but it will not get
165.10.185.0/24 until I do a second routing process, like OSPF 10,
redistribute the original process into this one, do a summary address
for
165.10.185.0/24 in the second process, and redistribute both processes
into
IGRP. I am having trouble understanding why, if both the 165.10.11.0
and
165.10.185.0 are OSPF internal routes, what is the difference, why
does
redistributing into the other process work? Sorry for the long email,
but I
really want to understand this.
~-----Original Message-----
~From: S. John Banner [mailto:jbanner@cisco.com]
~Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 6:08 PM
~To: Rodrigo Espinha T Da Silva; ccielab@groupstudy.com
~Subject: RE: solie skinet lab - and the old topic ospf-igrp
~
~
~ To get this to work (I did it yesterday), redistribute all
~OSPF routes
~into the second OSPF process, which makes them all External
~routes, and as
~such not redistributable (the original OSPF routes are
redistributable
~because they are internal and thus prefered over the external
~routes and
~thus appear in the routing table). Then use "summary-address"
~to summarize
~in the second OSPF process. These summarized routes show up
~in the routing
~table (because that is the only place they appear) and are thus
~redistributable. Finally, redistribute *BOTH* OSPF processes
~into IGRP (and
~make sure that IGRP has a higher admin distance than OSPF or
~everything will
~break).
~ Also, make sure that you don't redistribute the summaries
~back into OSPF
~as that will cause nasty problems...
~
~ sjb.
~
~> -----Original Message-----
~> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On
~Behalf Of
~> Rodrigo Espinha T Da Silva
~> Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 9:29 AM
~> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
~> Subject: solie skinet lab - and the old topic ospf-igrp
~>
~>
~> Hi Guys,
~>
~> I did the skynet and still have the problem with redistribution
~> between ospf
~> and igrp :
~>
~> regardind the mask /28 ospf to /24 igrp , the solution
~discussed in email
~> before ( 25/jan untilll 29/jan ) regarding create another
~ospf process and
~> use the summary adrress comand works perfect, I tried to
~create in the R3
~> router and ABR configuring the loopback in another area , works
~> for the ospf
~> database , i can see an summarized network geneated for the
~area 0 range
~> command in R1 , but does'nt solve the redistr problem ( help ).
~>
~>
~> I can't find a solution for /28 ospf to /24 igrp ( reverse
~> summarization ),
~> someone can send me an numeric example.
~> help!
~>
~> challenge day : 27/fev
~>
~> thanks in advance
~>
~> Rodrigo E. Teixeira da Silva
~>
~>
~> Rodrigo E. Teixeira da Silva
~> CPM Comunicacoes
~> Analista de Suporte Tecnico
~> CCNP Lan & Wan Certified.
~> Phone: + 55-11-4196-0793
~> Fax: + 55-11-4196-0900
~> Call Dispach: 0800-117239
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 20 2002 - 13:46:16 GMT-3