From: Nelson Salvatorelli (nsalvato@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Mar 23 2002 - 11:23:24 GMT-3
Chris,
Don't know about the old versions (new versions hve it, i.e 12.1,12.2),
but at least you can try 'debug ip rip', 'debug ip rip events' and it
should show you the tag in the update.
Mar 1 01:48:30.519: RIP: build update entries
Mar 1 01:48:30.523: 0.0.0.0/0 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
Mar 1 01:48:30.527: 100.1.3.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
Mar 1 01:48:30.527: 100.1.4.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
Mar 1 01:48:30.531: 100.1.5.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
Mar 1 01:48:30.535: 100.1.6.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
Mar 1 01:48:30.539: 100.1.7.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
Mar 1 01:48:30.543: 100.1.8.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
Mar 1 01:48:30.547: 200.0.1.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 1
Cheers,
-nelson
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian C. Aguillo [mailto:chris_aguillo@alfalak.com]
> Sent: 23 March 2002 13:53
> To: GroupStudy
> Subject: Affects of Redistribution on Tags
>
>
> Hi Gang,
>
> For your comments:
> when BGP is redistributed in RIP2, The tag field contains the
> BGP AS. but how about if it came from OSPF/EIGPR/IGRP/IS?
>
> do you know of shareware sniffer-like software to check on this field?
>
> Thanks for your elightenment....
>
> Chris
>
> ######################################################################
> Attention:
> This e-mail is privileged and confidential. If you are not
> the intended recipient please delete the message and notify
> the sender. Any views or opinions presented are solely those
> of the author.
>
> Note:
> This email has been virus scanned and cleared. Should you
> encounter any virus problems and deem them as our
> responsibility please notify us immediately.
> ######################################################################
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:19 GMT-3