From: yakout esmat (yesmat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Apr 18 2002 - 09:12:22 GMT-3
Tarek,
What I know about Virtual link is that it assumes the status of
point-to-point and not non-broadcast as you mentioned, you can check that by
"sh ip ospf virt.." command as follows:
r7>sh ip ospf v
Virtual Link OSPF_VL0 to router 148.5.1.1 is up
Run as demand circuit
DoNotAge LSA allowed.
Transit area 51, via interface Ethernet0, Cost of using 10
Transmit Delay is 1 sec, State POINT_TO_POINT,
Timer intervals configured, Hello 10, Dead 40, Wait 40, Retransmit 5
Hello due in 00:00:05
Adjacency State FULL (Hello suppressed)
Index 1/3, retransmission queue length 0, number of retransmission 1
First 0x0(0)/0x0(0) Next 0x0(0)/0x0(0)
Last retransmission scan length is 1, maximum is 1
Last retransmission scan time is 0 msec, maximum is 0 msec
In this case you don't have to worry about DR/BDR status.
I will regreat this scenario in my lab and post the findings.
HTH
Ya
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Tarek Sabry
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 12:53 PM
To: 'Jason'; tsabry@slb.com; 'Wade Edwards'
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Virtual Links
Jason and all
I think I found the source of my problem. You're right, stubbiness has
nothing to do with this. Even though I will let it stand for another hour, I
think I have a good explanation for what was happening.
Area 1 is a non-broadcast area, therefore needing r4 to be nailed up as DR.
However, even though I put a priority of 255 on r4's interface, I never
cared to put a priority of 0 on r2 and r3. Therefore, once I reset r4 for
some reason, it never resumed its DR status. Once one of the spokes becomes
the DR things start going screwy with virtual links because one spoke talks
to the other spoke sending it a type-4 LSA that contains itself.
Pheww! I hope we killed this one for good! Please feel free to comment
though.
Tarek
-----Original Message-----
From: Jason [mailto:jgraun@attbi.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 9:18 PM
To: tsabry@slb.com; 'Wade Edwards'
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Virtual Links
I do not think the stub will make a difference.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tarek Sabry [mailto:tsabry@houston.sns.slb.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 9:04 PM
To: 'Jason'; 'Wade Edwards'
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Virtual Links
In fact I get an error message on r3 right before the VL goes down. The
error says: Detected router with duplicate router id xxx.xxx.x.x (which
is
itself by the way!) in type-4 LSA advertised bt xxx.xx.xx.x (which is
r4).
Jason, see if you get the same error. Hmmm so how are we going to handle
that now? Everybody seems to agree that this should work! By the way do
we
need to make area 2 some kind of stub so that no router LSAs get
generated
from it? Or do I have the definition of stub backwards??
Tarek
-----Original Message-----
From: Jason [mailto:jgraun@attbi.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 8:21 PM
To: 'Tarek Sabry'; 'Wade Edwards'
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Virtual Links
Given your diagram you might have a problem on R4. I haven't been able
to use two virtual links going to the same RID in the same area, which
what you would have on R4, but give it a try and see.
Jason
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Tarek Sabry
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 5:52 PM
To: 'Wade Edwards'
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Virtual Links
Wade
No I don't have 2 different transit areas. Just area 1 is a transit
area. Do
I still need 2 virtual links???? There's a LAN between r2 and r3. I made
a
silly ASCII thing here that I hope will show up in e-mail.
-------(area 1)------(r2)-----(area 2)
/
(area 0 )----(r4)--------
\
--------(area 1)------(r3)-----(area 2)
Thanks
Tarek
-----Original Message-----
From: Wade Edwards [mailto:wade.edwards@powerupnetworks.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 5:32 PM
To: Tarek Sabry
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Virtual Links
You have to have two virtual links. If you have two routers and there
are two paths through two different transit areas you will need to have
two virtual links between those two routers. One through each transit
area.
I always thought if you have authentication on OSPF area 0 then you need
to have that specified on the virtual-link because the virtual-link is
part of area 0, which has authentication. If you had to take off the
MD5 authentication from the virtual-link in order to get the
virtual-link to come up what is the purpose of the command on the
virtual-link.
I guess it must be YAIB (Yet Another IOS Bug).
L8r.
-----Original Message-----
From: Tarek Sabry [mailto:tsabry@houston.sns.slb.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2002 4:59 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Virtual Links
Hi
This is a quick one. When I have 2 spokes that can act as ABRs between
area
1 and area 2 let's say, do I need 2 virtual links to area 0? Or should I
only have one virtual link that I choose?
Another question, if area 0 is authenticated then do I have to enable
authentication on the virtual link? I thought I should, but the only way
I'm
able to bring one of the virtual links up is to remove the md5
authentication!! Is there a problem because I'm using 2 parallel VLinks
or
this is the way it is supposed to work?
Thanks
Tarek
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:58:12 GMT-3