From: Engelhard M. Labiro (engelhard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Apr 11 2002 - 08:01:33 GMT-3
Hi Donny,
As you write down at your flow chart program,. suppose RIP receives
route 192.16.1.4/30
1. Is subnet info of 192.16.1.4/30 (which is 192.16.0.0) is the same
with subnet of the interface (which is 128.200.0.0) ?
2. No, major net 128.200.0.0 is not equal to 192.16.0.0.
3. Summarize the route to its major net and advertise it.
So the route 192.168.1.4/30 will be advertised as 192.16.0.0/16
In Solie`s book p.622 , the example is using network 128.200.3.16/29,
which will be drop.
> this is exactly what puzzles me.
> The general behaviour said that it will check on the following manner (ref to
> http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/105/54.html)
> if (subnet info = major net)
> {
> if (subnet mask = source update interface mask)
> advertise
> else
> drop
> }
> else
> summarize.
>
> Now..the problem is 192.16.1.4/30 is received in Rogue E0/1, by EIGRP I suppo
se
> and then injected to RIP.
> So rip will have this network and try to advertise it out to the next router
> using it's other interface E0/0
>
> E0/0 has an ip address of 128.200.1.2/24 which is not of the same major netwo
rk
> with the route that is going to be advertise. If we based the logic on RIP
> behaviour, the packet should be automatically summarized by RIP.
> So.. perhaps now it's also questionable to ask whether injected route from ot
her
> routing protocol falls within this behaviour or perhaps there is something I
> miss...
>
> Thanks in advance for all the reply
>
> Donny
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Engelhard M. Labiro" <engelhard@netmarks.co.jp> on 10-04-2002 20:34:14
>
> To: Donny MATEO/ADPC/ASIA/BANQUE_INDOSUEZ/FR@Banque Indosuez,
> ccielab@groupstudy.com
> cc:
>
> Subject: Re: Q. Redistribution from EIGRP to RIP
>
>
>
> Hi Donny,
>
> Regarding redistribution of EIGRP to RIP, thats the behaviour
> of RIP as it compares its own mask with a route`s mask and
> decides from there whether it should advertise the route
> or just drop the route. See the following URL:
> http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/105/54.html
>
>
> Engelhard M. Labiro
>
> (c) 2001 Credit Agricole Indosuez. All rights reserved. This message is
> for information purposes only and its content should not be construed as an
> offer, or solicitation of an offer, to buy or sell any banking or financial
> instruments or services and no representation of warranty is given in
> respect of its accuracy, completeness or fairness. The material is subject
> to change without notice. We may use the material or the information on
> which it is based prior to its dissemination. We may have a long or short
> position in, make a sale or purchase of, offer to make a sale or purchase
> of, make a market in or have underwritten, any of the banking or financial
> instruments mentioned in this message or, where applicable, any securities
> or issuers underlying such banking or financial instruments. You should
> take your own independent tax, legal and other professional advice in
> respect of the content of this message. This message may not be copied,
> redistributed or published (in whole or in part) without our prior written
> consent. This email may have been intercepted, partially destroyed, arrive
> late, incomplete or contain viruses and no liablility is accepted as a
> result. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please
> immediately notify the sender and delete this message from your computer.
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> $B!!(B(engelhard@netmarks.co.jp)
> Security Group, Technical Solution Center, Netmarks Inc.
> 2-13-34 Konan, Minato-Ku, Tokyo 108-0075
> Tel: +81-3-5461-2575, Fax: +81-3-5461-2093
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <donny.mateo@sg.ca-indosuez.com>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 5:26 PM
> Subject: Q. Redistribution from EIGRP to RIP
>
>
> > Dear All,
> >
> > I was reading Solie's book CCIE practical studies.
> > on the chapter concerning RIP there is a sample of redistribution
> > between RIP and EIGRP ( Figure 9.4 page 622)
> > it says that if we were to redistribute route which is not having the
> > same subnet mask from EIGRP to RIP, it wouln't show in the routing
> > table of RIP. It puzzle me as to what is the reason behind this
> > behaviour ?
> > The diagram is something like
> >
> > E0/0-ip:128.200.1.2/24 rtr1 ---E0/1 IP:128.200.3.18/29 ---------
> > E0-IP:128.200.3.17/29 rtr2
> >
> > rtr1 won't have network 128.200.3.0/29 in it's routing table.
> >
> > thanks
> > Donny
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:58:05 GMT-3