From: Tshon (tshon@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon May 20 2002 - 13:05:29 GMT-3
I think what you are looking for is this:
The router hub or HQ router you should place neighbor statements on it,
these statements should have
the default Priority on them. This makes the remotes ineligible to
become the DR/BDR. And only the
Hub or HQ can become the DR/BDR. Now, as for statements place on the
Remotes listing the Hub or HQ,
you should set a Priority higher than 0.
David Luu wrote:
> on an interface the default ospf priority is 1
> when specifying neighbors in an nbma environment, the default is 0
>
> At 03:39 PM 5/19/2002 +0800, Schwantz wrote:
>
>> David,
>>
>> If that is the case, what does Doyle mean when he says that the default
>> priority is 0 ?
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "David Luu" <wicked01@ix.netcom.com>
>> To: "Kevin Mitnick" <kevin_ross46@yahoo.co.uk>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>> Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2002 2:45 PM
>> Subject: Re: Jeff Doyle pg 558 OSPF defauly priority 0
>>
>>
>> > default priority is 1, and yes priority 0 does not let it
>> participate in
>> > the DR selection
>> >
>> > At 06:37 AM 5/19/2002 +0100, Kevin Mitnick wrote:
>> > >Hi,
>> > >
>> > >I was reading page 558 of Jeff Doyle's Routing TCP/IP Volume 1 and
>> came
>> > >across this paragraph.
>> > >
>> > >"The neighbor command configures Rembrandt with the IP addresses
>> of the
>> > >interfaces of its three neighbors. The default priority is zero;
>> by not
>> > >changing the default at Rembrandt, none of its neighbors is
>> eligible to
>> > >become the DR or BDR?
>> > >
>> > >Doesn't having priority zero make a router ineligible to be DR or
>> BDR ?
>> > >
>> > >When I read Solie ( CCIE Practical Studies page 762), it wrote
>> > >
>> > >"The hub router of the multipoint network, or the router that has
>> a PVC
>> > >to each site, should be statically configured as the DR. To
>> accomplish
>> > >this, set the priority of the spoke or remote routers to 0. A
>> priority
>> > >of 0 tells OSPF that this interface or neighbor will not
>> participate in
>> > >the DR/BDR election process"
>> > >
>> > >Am I missing something ? Could someone help clarify the above two
>> > >statements ? I read the archives and someone said that it might have
>> > >something to do with the nieghbor statements. However, both books
>> used
>> > >the neighbor statements to identify their neigbors.
>> > >
>> > >Kevin
>> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:59:02 GMT-3