From: Bruno Poussard (bpoussard@xxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Mar 18 2002 - 12:58:34 GMT-3
Jon,
With a poor design like this one :
11.0.0.0
C
|
------------------------------------
| |
A B
10.1.0.0 10.2.0.0
If you use auto-summary, C will see 10.0.0.0/8 2 times with equal costs.
Then if somebody is using 10.2.0.1 as source IP@ (destination network
11.0.0.0), you will have RTR-C sending back packets to A and the next
time to B, depending on the type of packet switching you use.
Nothing to do with the power of the routers as you can see.
Hope it helps
Bruno #6424
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Jon O'Nan
Sent: lundi 18 mars 2002 16:27
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: When to use "no auto-summary"
Can anyone enlighten me on a general rule when using no auto-summary in
different routing protocols? I am aware of the implications of large
routing tables when not summarizing, what I would like to know is if you
are not concerned about processor or memory, is it ok to always use "no
auto-summary"?
Thanks
Jon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:12 GMT-3