From: Bob Sinclair (bsin@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Mar 06 2002 - 16:51:03 GMT-3
Paul,
I have been able to get ospf routes from Router A to have a higher or lower adm
in distance than ospf routes from Router B. Was able to give the same ospf rou
te two different admin distances, depending on the source of the route.
Don't know if it would solve your particular problem.
As I recall, if I want admin distance of 125 for route 172.16.5.0 when it comes
from OSPF RID 6.6.6.6 then:
router ospf 1
net..
distance 125 6.6.6.6 0.0.0.0 1
access-list 1 permit 172.16.5.0 0.0.0.255
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Borghese" <pborghese@groupstudy.com>
To: "Bob Sinclair" <bsin@erols.com>
Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: Virtual Links and Backup Interfaces in OSPF
> I don't think this will work as both routes are learned via OSPF. The admin
> distance is for selecting which protocol to believe if two different routing
> protocols are advertising the same route.
>
> Am I missing something?
>
> Paul Borghese
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Sinclair" <bsin@erols.com>
> To: "Paul Borghese" <paul98@prodigy.net>
> Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 2:15 PM
> Subject: Re: Virtual Links and Backup Interfaces in OSPF
>
>
> > Just a thought: what if you raised the admin distance for ospf routes
> learned from the router on the other side of the BRI? I have had some
> success doing this with ospf.
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Paul Borghese" <paul98@prodigy.net>
> > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 1:34 PM
> > Subject: Virtual Links and Backup Interfaces in OSPF
> >
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have created a practice scenario using the following setup (OSPF
> protocol):
> > >
> > > R1 is connected to R2 and the connection is in Area 0. R2 is connected
> to R5
> > > in Area 100. R5 has a backup ISDN link to R1. I made this backup Link
> area
> > > 101 and created a virtual link through area 101 to connect Area 100 in
> case
> > > the connection to R2 ever went down. R1 has a route (172.16.1.0) which
> is in
> > > Area 0.
> > >
> > > The problem I am having is R5 always prefers to use the BRI interface to
> get
> > > to 172.16.1.0 instead of using the connection to R2. I even set the
> cost of
> > > the BRI interface to be 10x that of the R2 connection. Here is the
> results on
> > > R5:
> > >
> > > With the ISDN line active:
> > > 172.16.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
> > > O 172.16.1.0 [110/10010] via 190.27.1.66, 00:52:04, Dialer0
> > >
> > > With the ISDN in Shutdown mode:
> > > 172.16.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
> > > O IA 172.16.1.0 [110/943] via 190.27.1.33, 00:00:03, Serial4
> > >
> > > Notice with the ISDN active, the router prefers to use the Dialer
> interface
> > > even though the metric is 10010 versus the Serial 4 interface with a
> metric of
> > > 943! I believe this is because the route learned via the Dialer0
> interface is
> > > an interior route and the route learned via the S4 interface is an
> InterArea
> > > route.
> > >
> > > So is there any way to get R5 to prefer the S4 route with the Dialer
> interface
> > > active? Of course one way to fix this would be to make the ISDN line
> area
> > > 100 and dump the Virtual Link. But I am wondering if there is a way to
> do it
> > > using the typology I created.
> > >
> > > Paul Borghese
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:56:55 GMT-3