From: Ouellette, Tim (tim.ouellette@xxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Mar 09 2002 - 11:59:28 GMT-3
Maybe i'm just not thinking correctly this morning. From r3's perspective.
Would it not send out an advertise on that link describing that link? Such
as, if r3 has the "network 10.0.0.0" statement in it and it's interface
pointing at r2 is 10.1.1.1/24. Would it not advertise the network 10.0.0.0
out that interface and therefor if r2 had igrp turned on for that particular
interface it'll take that update and redistribute it?
-----Original Message-----
From: Curtis Phillips [mailto:cphillips@blazenet.net]
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 9:31 AM
To: RSiddappa@NECBNS.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: OSPF and Conneted.
from the perspective of r2 the link between r2 and r3
is a connected route. It will not be redistributed into
OSPF from IGRP. So, yes you have to either a) place it in theOSPF domain
with a network statement and passive-interface or b) redistribute it as a
connected route into OSPF.
----- Original Message -----
From: <RSiddappa@NECBNS.com>
To: <RSiddappa@NECBNS.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2002 8:56 AM
Subject: OSPF and Conneted.
> r1--------------------------r2----------------------------------------r3
>
> R1 in area 0 and ( OSPF)
>
> r1 and r2 in area 1 (/28) (OSPF)
>
> r2 and r3 runngin IGRP (/24)
>
> I ahve created a loop back of /28 on the R2 and summarized in OSPF and
> redistributed in to oSPF.
>
> All this is fine.
>
> I am not seeing the /24 IGRP route on r1.
>
> Do I need to do redistribute connected. If yes wwhat if they say
redistibute
> between OSFP and IGRP mutually.
>
> R.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:56:58 GMT-3