From: Katson PN Yeung (kyeung@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri May 03 2002 - 07:27:42 GMT-3
Hi Parry,
I do think this is the proper degree perference to treat with this kind of
problem... The only clue is, if the proctor like this piggy-back ospf
solution or not? I am thinking of doing this with EIGRP instead of
secondary OSPF. :-)
At 03:32 PM 5/3/2002, Chua, Parry wrote:
>Below are my prefer order of suggestions and may not be best :-
>
>1. Create a new ospf process ospf_2 at R3, redistribute the area 0 /29 to
>ospf_2, address summary into /24. At R3 IGRP, redistribute ospf_2.
>
>2. Create a new area in R3, put it loopback in this new area, do area 0
>range to /24.
>
>3. At R3, create a secondary ip address with /29 at s0.1, disable
>split-horizon, do filter to act as split-horizon.
>
>4. Create tunnel interface between R3/R4 with /29.
>
>1 and 2 does not add any thing.
>3 and 4 will allocate ip addresses.
>
> > Parry Chua
> >
> >
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Perminder Grewal [mailto:percy_gunner@hotmail.com]
>Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 2:17 PM
>To: kyeung@hkcix.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: Re: Solie's P.791 confusion.((BIG HELP)
>
>
>Can anyone help
>
>
>I tried this scenario in my lab yesterday the basic set up is the same as
>yours.
>
> > R4
> > |s0
> > |
> > --s0.1---| R1---|e0
> >|e0-R3< /
> > --s0.2---------<
> > \
> > R2---|e0
>
>
>1) the frame is a /29 area 0 (r3 r2 r1)
>2) R1 and R2 are ABR area 0 and area 1 (e0) /25
>3) R3 to R4 is a /24 igrp. ASBR (area 0 and IGRP)
>
>A) I can summarise the /25 to a /24 and the routers R1 and R2 have a null0
>in the route table and R4 gets the /24 from area 1.
>
>B) I've done the same on R3 summarise /29 to a /24 this does not put in a
>null0 in the R3 route table and in doing so does not advertise that prefix
>to R4.
>
>Solution??????
>
>I tried the the summ on R1 and R2 for area 0 it puts in the /24 nullO in
>there route table but R3 does not have it and in doing so does not advertise
>to R4.
>
>I got over the problem by including a static route /24 in R3 to null0 and
>then redistributed that static to in IGRP in doing so R4 gets the /24 for
>area.
>
>If anyone can shed any light, please let me know. I tried every combo last
>night and could only do this by the static method.
>
>
>Cheers
>
>Percy
>
>
>
>
> >From: Katson PN Yeung <kyeung@hkcix.com>
> >Reply-To: Katson PN Yeung <kyeung@hkcix.com>
> >To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >Subject: Solie's P.791 confusion.
> >Date: Fri, 03 May 2002 09:29:31 +0800
> >
> >Dear group,
> >
> >I have a question about Solie's book P.791.
> >
> >On the 2nd paragraph from the top, it saids:
> >"You cannot summarize Area 0 or the backbone area. All summaries are
> >flooded into area 0 and then are flooded out from that point. Therefore
> >Area 0 routes cannot be summarized"
> >
> >However, in the scenario such as below:
> >
> > R4
> > |s0
> > |
> > --s0.1---| R1---|e0
> >|e0-R3< /
> > --s0.2---------<
> > \
> > R2---|e0
> >
> >Where R3s0.2, R1s0, and R2s0 forming OSPF area 0 (/28 subnet)
> >- R1e0 area 1 (/24)
> >- R2e0 area 2 (/24)
> >- R3e0 being area 3 (/24 or whatever)
> >- R3 s0.1 and R4 running igrp (/24)
> >
> >Isn't it easy (and convenient) to create a /24 summary route by "area 0
> >range x.x.x.x 255.255.255.0" at R3, and then get it redistributed to igrp?
> >I did they before since the redis connected/summary ASBR method doesn't
> >work now.
> >
> >Solie P.791 makes me confused. Can someone clarifies if this "area 0
> >range" method is "okay to use" in the real lab environment?
> >
> >Or just like someone saids, tunnel method, sec interface method? or even
> >piggy-back OSPF
> >method are the more preferable way to make a /24 summary route?
> >
> >Thanks a lot.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:58:49 GMT-3