From: Peter van Oene (pvo@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Feb 16 2002 - 20:36:44 GMT-3
I would peer on loopbacks unless specifically instructed not too. As far
as OSPF is concerned, barring instructions to the contrary, I would
recommend always using the exact match mask (0.0.0.0) for precision.
At 10:32 PM 2/16/2002 +0000, Carl Phelan wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>Is it possible to include a loopback address on a router when one is not
>specified or requested and use it in BGP in the update-source command without
>being penalised? I know that this is recommended in the real world so must be
>reflected in the lab - I hope. Also, when defining OSPF areas is it more
>acceptable to stipulate the exact interface address or its subnet e.g
>192.168.1.1/24 on s0 - can this be 'network 192.168.1.1 0.0.0.0 area 0' or
>'192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0' - which is preferred in the lab again if a
>preference is not stated?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Carl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 20 2002 - 13:46:25 GMT-3