From: Przemyslaw Karwasiecki (karwas@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Feb 22 2002 - 17:25:40 GMT-3
Thank you.
Now I understand it.
I was under false assumption that OSPF RIDs needs to be
reachable in a similar way to BPG peer address.
Hence my question about virtual-links using interface IPs,
something like BGP without Loopbacks....
Thanks for clarification.
Przemek
On Fri, 2002-02-22 at 15:04, Wade Edwards wrote:
> The OSPF RID has the format of an IP address but does not have to be an
> IP address of an interface on that router. If you configure a RID of
> 6.6.6.6, that address will NOT be pingable since it does not appear in
> the routing table but, it does need to be unique in the OSPF network.
> Cisco chooses the highest IP address of an addressed interface
> configured on the router for the RID because it is the easiest way to
> ensure its uniqueness in the network. I personally like to set the RID
> on my OSPF routers so that if an interface goes down it will not change
> the routers OSPF RID and break any virtual-links previously configured.
>
> To answer your question about setting the virtual-link to an interface
> IP address on the router instead of the OSPF RID, the answer is NO. It
> MUST be the RID.
>
> HTH L8r.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Przemyslaw Karwasiecki [mailto:karwas@ifxcorp.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 1:12 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: OSPF virtual links
>
> Group,
>
> Simple question:
>
> Is it possible to create virtual link (connect virtual areas)
> using interface address instead of OSPF router ID?
> Cisco documentation says:
> area <area-id> virtual-link <router-id>
>
> Obviously, using RID is better for stability reasons,
> but one can imagine hyphothetical situation when OSPF RID
> is not in routing table, so it would not be reachable for
> virtual-link.
>
> Comments?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Przemek
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 20 2002 - 13:46:31 GMT-3