From: yakout (yesmat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Mar 03 2002 - 09:37:35 GMT-3
Hi all,
First, IGRP is different than RIP in terms of /32. IGRP doesn't understand
/32 like RIP does.
Second, What I meant by ALL OSPF(1) routes is, in my ASBR I had many routes
(same major net, different major nets all classes etc..), none of then have
been redistributed into IGRP except the networks that I summarized in
OSPF(2) using summary-address command.
This lead me to believe that the only way to do that is to redistribute both
ospf processes into IGRP, and once I dont that every thing was shweet.
My question is, Is that the way to do things or what??
Cheers
-----Original Message-----
From: alain faure [mailto:alainfaure@yahoo.fr]
Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2002 10:21 PM
To: yakout; Chua, Parry; erickbe@yahoo.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Another OSPF into IGRP issue
Hi,
When you speak about ALL OSPF (1)route. If you mean routes beginning with
137.20.0.0, it is not possible (that's why you need to summarize to / 24
before
redistribute).
If you mean routes with an other major subnet there is two possibilities (i
take an example with 10.0.0.0):
- a route in 10.0.0.0 /8 will be redistributed without problem with IGRP
- a route in 10.0.0.0 /16 will have a problem with IGRP
from the routing table i can see some others example (if they where in the
ospf
database!):
172.16.0.0/24 (normaly /16)
200.200.100.0/32 (normaly /24)
Somebody can find a solution for that ?
By the way, somebody knows if IGRP have the same behavior than RIP for host
route (/32) ?
Don't forget to upgrade your IOS.
Best regards
--- yakout <yesmat@iprimus.com.au> a icrit : > I did exactely that and it
worked fine. EXCEPT that OSPF(2) only distributed
> summary-address command networks into IGRP and nothing else. Don't we need
> to redistribute ALL OSPF(1) routes into IGRP??
> If the answer is YES, then don't we need to redistribute BOTH OSPF(1)(2)
> into IGRP??
>
> Thanks for your great help mate
>
> Yakout
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chua, Parry [mailto:Parry.Chua@compaq.com]
> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 8:12 PM
> To: yakoout; erickbe@yahoo.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Another OSPF into IGRP issue
>
>
> Your R4 with IOS, I belive the latest IOS will not allow you toe summary
> from OSPF and redistribute to other routing protocols, it is not the
> right way. Only when OSPF is the input process (ie redistribute into
> OSPF, then summary will work).
>
> You can either create another OSPF(2) and redistribute the OSPF(1) with
> /27 to OSPF(2) and
> then summary at OSPF(2) as /24. Then at IGRP, redistribute OSPF(2) .
>
> Another way is to make R4 as ABR by create a dummy OSPF area then us
> area 0 range will also work.
>
> Regards
> Parry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: yakoout [mailto:yesmat@iprimus.com.au]
> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 1:08 PM
> To: erickbe@yahoo.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Another OSPF into IGRP issue
>
>
> IOS on R4 is 11.3 (11a)
> IOS on R3 (IGRP) IS 12.1 (11)
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erick B. [mailto:erickbe@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2002 3:59 PM
> To: yakoout; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Another OSPF into IGRP issue
>
>
> What version of code?
>
> --- yakoout <yesmat@iprimus.com.au> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Sorry guys if the point has been killed before but I
> > actually can't simulate
> > the redistribution problem that every body was
> > talking about for such a long
> > time, in other words my scenario is working and I
> > can't get it NOT to work.
> >
> > Scenario:
> >
> > SIMPLE.
> > R4 running ospf AND igrp (redistributing mutually
> > both ways)
> > OSPF area 0 with 137.20.5.0/27.
> > IGRP with 137.20.6.0/24
> >
> > To summarize /27 into /24 and succesfully
> > redistribute into igrp, I used
> > "summary-address 137.20.5.0 255.255.255.0" on R4,
> > WITHOUT using
> > "redistribute connected..."
> >
> > PROBLEM:
> >
> > Even though network 137.20.5.0 is NOT EXTERNAL (it
> > is connected) it still
> > works and I can see the summarized route in R4
> > routing table to NULL0 and
> > hence I can also see it in IGRP routers.
> >
> > What am I doing wrong?
> >
> > Thanks for your input
> >
> > Yakout
> > R4:
> >
> > router ospf 100
> > summary-address 137.20.5.0 255.255.255.0
> > redistribute igrp 100 subnets
> > network 137.20.5.4 0.0.0.0 area 0
> > neighbor 137.20.5.5 priority 1
> > neighbor 137.20.5.2 priority 5
> >
> > router igrp 100
> > redistribute ospf 100
> > passive-interface Serial0.1
> > network 137.20.0.0
> > default-metric 1000 1 255 255 1500
> >
> >
> > r4#sh ip route
> > Codes: C - connected, S - static, I - IGRP, R - RIP,
> > M - mobile, B - BGP
> > D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA
> > - OSPF inter area
> > N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF
> > NSSA external type 2
> > E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external
> > type 2, E - EGP
> > i - IS-IS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS
> > level-2, * - candidate
> > default
> > U - per-user static route, o - ODR
> >
> > Gateway of last resort is not set
> >
> > 137.20.0.0/16 is variably subnetted, 6 subnets,
> > 3 masks
> > C 137.20.10.4/32 is directly connected,
> > Loopback1
> > O IA 137.20.10.2/32 [110/65] via 137.20.5.2,
> > 00:07:16, Serial0.1
> > O 137.20.5.0/24 is a summary, 00:07:10, Null0
> > C 137.20.5.0/27 is directly connected,
> > Serial0.1
> > C 137.20.6.0/24 is directly connected,
> > Serial0.2
> > 200.200.100.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
> > C 200.200.100.1 is directly connected,
> > Loopback0
> > 172.16.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
> > C 172.16.1.0 is directly connected, Loopback3
> > C 192.168.1.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:56:51 GMT-3