From: Gregg Malcolm (greggm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Mar 20 2002 - 14:10:57 GMT-3
Peter,
My reasoning is as follows. Please remember that this applies to a lab
scenario and not the *real* world :
Lets assume that you are asked to do the following :
1. Config loop on R1 and place into area 0
2. Connect R1 to R2 and place this connection in area 1
3. Connect R2 to R3 and place this connection into area 2 (virtual link for
area 1)
! All works well for me up to this point
4. Connect R3 to R4 and place this connection in area 0
When step 4 is completed there is a dis-contiguous area 0. I've personally
tried it several times this a.m. Every time I add the connection between R3
and R4 in this hypothetical example, I lose the route to the loop on R1 on
the R3 router. I assume this is because the ospf databases on R1/R2 differ
from R3/R4 because there are 2 sets of area 0's.
Imagine that you are taking a well known test and are asked to do step 4
several pages after completing step 1. In the heat of the battle, it would
be easy to forget that an area 0 had already been configured. It could also
be argued that if authentication was done on area 0 (might be likely), that
if you forgot to add auth under the interface, you could lose points there.
I know that a loop can't have neighbors, but when in doubt, I opt for the
safest bet.
My point is, whenever I'm given a preference regarding anything on a test,
I'll try to do what's safest and then what's easier in that order. Seems to
me, if given a choice, placing loops on a non zero area are a good idea when
practical and possible.
Is there a downside of not using non zero area's on loops ? Other than if
you are not connected to area 0 and must use virtual links ?
Gregg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter van Oene" <pvo@usermail.com>
To: "Gregg Malcolm" <greggm@sbcglobal.net>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2002 7:27 AM
Subject: Re: OSPF and Loopback Intfs????
> What is the downside of using area 0 on loops?
>
> At 04:59 PM 3/19/2002 -0800, Gregg Malcolm wrote:
> >Area 51 always works well for me :) Sorry, I couldn't resist. Doesn't
> >really matter but by all means try not to use area 0 on loops.
> >
> >Gregg
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Don Banyong" <don_study@hotmail.com>
> >To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 4:25 PM
> >Subject: OSPF and Loopback Intfs????
> >
> >
> > > Is there any specific OSPF area that is deemed appropriate for putting
> > > loopback interfaces into?
> > > If there is, why?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:14 GMT-3