From: ying chang (ying_c@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Apr 21 2002 - 17:37:35 GMT-3
In that case, can we break 86.0/24 to two 86.0/25 and 86.128/25?
>From: hong tony <aamercado31@yahoo.com>
>To: ying chang <ying_c@hotmail.com>, ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: Re: FLSM has longer mask than VLSM Probl.
>Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 13:30:10 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Ying
>
>That is one of my dilemnas. I want to stick with the
>80.x subnetwork with the /25 mask and I am already
>using 80.1 and 80.129 so there is no more address to
>use for secondary or tunnels.
>
>
>--- ying chang <ying_c@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > The netmask in flsm has to be the same (see Doyle I
> > pg 205), i.e. you either
> > have to use all /24 or all /25 in your igrp domain.
> > If you don't want to
> > change that, you can add a secondary address or
> > tunnel with /25 netmask to
> > bring the network to ospf. Make sure you either turn
> > off split-horizon or
> > use unicast instead of broadcast if you decide to
> > use the secondary address.
> > Which domain has a longer netmask is non-issue here.
> >
> >
> > >From: hong tony <aamercado31@yahoo.com>
> > >Reply-To: hong tony <aamercado31@yahoo.com>
> > >To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > >Subject: FLSM has longer mask than VLSM Probl.
> > >Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 12:06:33 -0700 (PDT)
> > >
> > >HI
> > >
> > >I search the archives and can't find an answer for
> > >this one.
> > >
> > >\lo0
> > >r8----r6-----r3
> > >/lo1
> > >
> > >r8/r6 is IGRP with r6 as the redistributing router
> > for
> > >the OSPF on r6/r13
> > >
> > >r8 ip address:
> > >lo0 = 172.16.80.1/25
> > >lo1 = 172.16.80.129/25
> > >s0= 172.16.86.8/24
> > >
> > >r6 ip address:
> > >s0 = 172.16.86.6/24
> > >s1 = 172.16.100.6/27
> > >
> > >r3 ip address:
> > >s1 = 172.16.100.3/27
> > >
> > >My question is - How can I can the 172.16.80.0
> > network
> > >into r6 routing table?
> > >
> > >If I put "ip route 172.16.80.0 255.255.255.0 null0"
> > >the route would propagate to r6/r3. However,
> > obviously
> > >I do not want to do statics...so here were my
> > >alternative attempts.
> > >
> > >1. default-network - Can't do it cuz of the
> > classful
> > >nature of this command which would propagate a
> > static
> > >route into r8.
> > >
> > >2. Summarizing - Nope cuz the IGRP (FLSM) has a
> > longer
> > >mask than OSPF (VLSM)
> > >
> > >3. secondary address - Because of the
> > 172.16.80.x/25
> > >mask is using up all the subnetworks for 80.x, I
> > don't
> > >have any other address to use for secondary
> > >
> > >4. tunnelling - same problem as #3
> > >
> > >5. policy routing - I can't see this as applicable
> > >
> > >Is this possible or am I stuck to the null 0
> > option.
> > >
> > >Thanks
> > >
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:58:15 GMT-3