From: Chua, Parry (Parry.Chua@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Apr 13 2002 - 01:27:12 GMT-3
A.3 Since the mask is the same, no action is require.
A.4 There is a supernet summary route 172.16.0.0/15 in OSPF, right ?
- IP default network if there is a class C nw or create one if allow.
- IP policy route
- Generate a lots of secondary /24 network adverise to IGRP domain, thi
s is bad solution.
B.*, I don't think you have to do anything if a major classful cross the IGRP
domain, it will just get a summary route.
> Parry Chua
>
-----Original Message-----
From: ying chang [mailto:ying_c@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2002 2:04 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: OSPF/IGRP summarizations
I know this topic has been covered many times, can someone please check if I
have them right?
Thanks.
A. OSPF and IGRP are in the same major network 172.16.x.x/16
A.1. 2.1/24--->ospf<-1.1/24---1.2/24-->igrp:
action: no need to do anything
A.2. 2.1/28--->ospf<-1.1/24---1.2/24-->igrp:
action: ospf summarize to 2.0/24
A.3. 2.1/28--->ospf<-1.1/28---1.2/28-->igrp:
action: need 3.1/24, 3.2/24 secondary address at ospf-igrp link and
ospf summarize to 2.0/24
A.4. 172.16.x.x/15->ospf<-1.1/24--1.1/24-->igrp:
action: ???
B. OSPF in 172.16.x.x/16, IGRP in 192.168.1.x/24, inter-network in
192.168.1.x:
B.1. 2.1/24->ospf<-1.1/24---1.2/24->igrp:
action: do nothing
B.2. 2.1/28->ospf<-1.1/24---1.2/24->igrp:
action: ospf summarize to 2.0/24
B.3. 2.1/28->ospf<-1.1/28---1.2/28->igrp:
action: need 192.168.3.1/24 and 192.168.3.2 secondary addresses, ospf
summarize to 2.0/24 network.
B.4. 172.16.0.0/15->ospf<-1.1/24--1.2/24->igrp:
action: ip default-network 2.0/24 in ospf
or reverse summaization to cover all 172.16.x.0/16 involved
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:58:07 GMT-3