From: Steven Weber (itweber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Feb 11 2002 - 18:08:09 GMT-3
172.16.1.160/28 OSPF RIP/OSPF
RIP 172.16.2.32/27
172.16.1.224/28 ROUTERA 172.16.1.144/28 ROUTERB 172.16.1.96/27 ROUTER C
172.16.2.64/27
172.16.1.128/28 e0
e1 172.16.2.128/27
172.16.1.192/28
I was trying to make a static route on routerb to 172.16.1.128
255.255.255.224 e0 so that RIP thinks that net is directly connected
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lupi, Guy" <Guy.Lupi@eurekaggn.com>
To: "'Steven Weber'" <itweber@earthlink.net>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 1:57 PM
Subject: RE: RIP and Loopbacks in OSPF.......
> Give an example of the IP addresses. What is the IP address of the
> interface participating in RIP, and what are the loopback addresses and
> masks?
>
> ~-----Original Message-----
> ~From: Steven Weber [mailto:itweber@earthlink.net]
> ~Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 2:00 PM
> ~To: Lupi, Guy; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> ~Subject: Re: RIP and Loopbacks in OSPF.......
> ~
> ~
> ~Guy,
> ~I'm not exactly sure what you are asking but OSPF and RIP are
> ~both using
> ~different masks. Doyle says that the way to fix this (739 #2)
> ~is by using a
> ~static route of the interface with the RIP mask on the
> ~redistributing router
> ~so that RIP thinks that these subnets are directly connected,
> ~but I can't
> ~seem to get that working
> ~
> ~Steve
> ~----- Original Message -----
> ~From: "Lupi, Guy" <Guy.Lupi@eurekaggn.com>
> ~To: "'Steven Weber'" <itweber@earthlink.net>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> ~Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 1:48 PM
> ~Subject: RE: RIP and Loopbacks in OSPF.......
> ~
> ~
> ~> They only need the mask native in RIP if they are in the
> ~same classful
> ~> network as the interface over which they are to be
> ~broadcast, is that what
> ~> you are seeing, that different masks in the same classful
> ~networks are
> ~seen
> ~> by RIP? If not this is the proper behavior, RIP can handle /32's.
> ~>
> ~> ~-----Original Message-----
> ~> ~From: Steven Weber [mailto:itweber@earthlink.net]
> ~> ~Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 12:55 PM
> ~> ~To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> ~> ~Subject: RIP and Loopbacks in OSPF.......
> ~> ~
> ~> ~
> ~> ~I made an interesting observation, I wanted to know if
> ~other people are
> ~> ~experiencing the same thing, and the logic behind it. When
> ~> ~redistributing
> ~> ~between OPSF and RIP I noticed that the loopbacks in OSPF
> ~> ~don't need to be
> ~> ~summarized in order for RIP to see them. OSPF advertises a
> ~> ~loopback as a /32
> ~> ~by default and RIP has no problem with this. However, once I
> ~> ~add the ip ospf
> ~> ~network point-to-point command on the loopbacks thereby
> ~> ~changing them from a
> ~> ~/32 to their true mask, once again RIP cannot see them unless
> ~> ~there is some
> ~> ~sort of summarization or default route in place. I don't
> ~> ~understand why RIP
> ~> ~sees these routes as a /32, shouldn't they need the mask
> ~> ~native to RIP in
> ~> ~order to be seen in RIP ?
> ~> ~
> ~> ~Does anyone have insight on this one?
> ~> ~
> ~> ~Regards,
> ~> ~
> ~> ~Steve
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 20 2002 - 13:46:19 GMT-3