From: Annu Roopa (annu_roopa@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon May 06 2002 - 14:36:58 GMT-3
Jack,
I agree with what u say.But think of it this way..it
depends on what one wants in Lab.What if the other
path happens to be ISDN path ? and not preferred now
but when the primary link fails ? and if routes are
filtered then what happens? i had this issue with one
of my homelab setups when learning ISDN..isdn backup
for a normal/ppp wan link and when isdn came up routes
were not seen ??
I have seen filtering does not always solve problems
of loops completely and also in one of Doyles case
study he shows filtering not solving it.
Anyone care to add ? any thoughts.
Annu.
--- Jack S <prospectccie@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thankyou Mas & Ying.
> Yes, #2 is definitely a better design. But is this
> needed? If the question in Lab doesn't explicitely
> ask
> for any redundancy, is it worth taking the pains to
> configure it? Both #1 & #1 works anyway right?
>
> -Jag
>
>
> --- ying chang <ying_c@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I have the book. In Doyle's "Case Study: Multiple
> > Redistribution Points" (pp
> > 787-794) shows #1 would break the redundancy. If
> > redundancy is the reason
> > why you use multi-redistribution points, you
> > probably should consider #2.
> >
> > Chang
> >
> >
> > >From: "Mas Kato" <loomis_towcar@speedracer.com>
> > >Reply-To: "Mas Kato"
> <loomis_towcar@speedracer.com>
> > >To: ccielab@groupstudy.com,
> prospectccie@yahoo.com
> > >Subject: RE: Redist: Filtering vs Fail-over
> > >Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 16:55:21 -0700
> > >
> > >[demime could not interpret encoding binary -
> > treating as plain text]
> > >#1, for me, by far and away because it offers the
> > greatest degree of
> > >control.
> > >
> > >I don't have Doyle's handy at the moment, so I'm
> > having difficulty making
> > >the leap between administrative 'distance' and
> > redundancy in a looped
> > >environment. Typically 'distance' is used to
> > arbitrarily prefer routes from
> > >a given routing protocol because you know it
> offers
> > better routes for the
> > >given topological constraints.
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >
> > >Mas Kato
> > >https://ecardfile.com/id/mkato
> > >
> > > >Date: Sat, 4 May 2002 16:09:25 -0700 (PDT)
> > > > Jack S <prospectccie@yahoo.com> Redist:
> > Filtering vs Fail-over
> > >ccielab@groupstudy.comReply-To: Jack S
> > <prospectccie@yahoo.com>
> > > >
> > > >Hi,
> > > >What is the best way to tackle redistribution
> in
> > a
> > > >topology involving loops? i.e., in a domain
> with
> > > >multiple redistribution points.
> > > >
> > > >1) Filter all routes so that only routes in
> that
> > > >domain are propagated
> > > >
> > > >2) Play with 'distance' command as described in
> > > >doyle's book so that redundancy is there in the
> > > >network.
> > > >
> > > >The 1st method is the easiest and the 2nd
> > involves
> > > >careful configuration.
> > > >
> > > >Please advise what method to follow.
> > > >
> > > >Thanks,
> > > >Jack
> > > >
> > >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:58:51 GMT-3