From: Jeongwoo Park (jpark@xxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri May 24 2002 - 17:34:57 GMT-3
Let me rephrase what I meant.
Ok.
If you use summary address or area range to summarize your local(connected)
network, ospf will create null route in your routing table
Now, if you use summary address or area range to summarize the routes that
you learned from your neighbor router, it won't create null route in your
routing table. You should create it yourself, which is considered as
creating static route.
JP
-----Original Message-----
From: Krucker, Louis [mailto:louis.krucker@sunrise.net]
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 11:51 AM
To: 'yijibin '
Cc: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
Subject: RE: Work-around on using null interface
Hi,
just a remark
A route to null created by area range or summary-address command
is not a static route because this route is created by ospf with distance
110 and static routes have distance 1 or am i wrong?
Louis
-----Original Message-----
From: yijibin
To: li jian hua
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Sent: 24.05.2002 06:48
Subject: Re: Work-around on using null interface
Area range command also make a null route!
You can use 'no discard internel' to disable the ospf process creating
the null route
----- Original Message -----
From: "li jian hua" <jasonli@cisco.com>
To: "Jeongwoo Park" <jpark@wams.com>
Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2002 12:11 PM
Subject: Re: Work-around on using null interface
> area range command does not make null interface
>
> you can use area range command
>
> do not use summary-address command.
>
> rgds
>
> At 20:36 2002-5-23 -0700, Jeongwoo Park wrote:
> >Hi
> >I was wondering what could be equivalent to using null interface.
> >I was redistributing ospf route 170.100.100.6/27 into igrp with the
summary
> >address of 170.100.100.0/24.
> >Once you summary under ospf, it is a must that you should use null
> >interface( ip route 170.100.100.0 255.255.255.0 null 0). Since using
null
> >interface is considered static route, what could be the substitute
for that?
> >I tried with distribute-list, but didn't work.
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >JP
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:59:08 GMT-3