From: Denise Donohue (denise@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue May 21 2002 - 21:40:14 GMT-3
Sorry for the misunderstanding. I was responding to what I read into
Bruce's answer. If you weren't allowed to nail the router id, then that's a
good argument for at least skimming the entire test before starting. Then
you could go ahead and put on any loopbacks before configuring the routing
protocols.
-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Shah [mailto:nshah@connect.com.au]
Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 8:33 PM
To: Denise Donohue; 'Bruce Williams'; 'Michael Snyder'
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: OSPF - practice approach (pseudo loopbacks)
Denise,
Of course what you are telling is true, however, the discussion was
revolving around 2 aspects, one being that *what if* we are not allowed to
use pseudo router id's ?
Nick
-----Original Message-----
From: Denise Donohue <denise@dtxnet.com>
To: 'Nick Shah' <nshah@connect.com.au>; 'Bruce Williams'
<bruce@williamsnetworking.com>; 'Michael Snyder' <msnyder@ldd.net>
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Date: Monday, 3 June 2002 8:22
Subject: RE: OSPF - practice approach (pseudo loopbacks)
>One thing you should know about all this is that the router id doesn't have
>to be an actual interface address on the router, in OSPF or in BGP either.
>It's just a number the router uses to identify itself. You can use 1.1.1.1
>etc without creating any new interfaces.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
>Nick Shah
>Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 2:42 PM
>To: Bruce Williams; Michael Snyder
>Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: Re: OSPF - practice approach (pseudo loopbacks)
>
>
>Guys,
>
>There are 2 approaches here ...We are..
>
>* allowed/disallowed to use our own router-id's (what we call pseudo id's)
>* allowed/disallowed to *nail* the router-id's
>
>In the first scenario, if allowed we can use router-id 1.1.1.1 (for RTRA)
>and so on. This obviously has its benefits (easy recognizability for one,
>stability of virtual links etc. the other).
>
>Even if we are not allowed to do the first, we can still do the second,
how.
>Say for example, after turning on OSPF processes on all of the routers in
>the lab, see what has been selected in terms of router-ids, say RtrA is
>192.168.250.250, still nail it as, router-id 192.168.250.250. This is
better
>because now whatever new loopbacks are added or if new ip addresses are
>assigned at a later stage in lab, the router id wont change on reload.
>
>What do you think of this ?
>
>rgds
>Nick
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Bruce Williams" <bruce@williamsnetworking.com>
>To: "Michael Snyder" <msnyder@ldd.net>
>Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 1:03 AM
>Subject: RE: OSPF - practice approach
>
>
>> That is what I figured. I will ask the proctor, but at least I know that
I
>> am not the only one who does that. I guess that is all I was really
>looking
>> for. I kind of wanted to see if anyone else did the same thing and you
>> validated that for me.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Michael Snyder [mailto:msnyder@ldd.net]
>> Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 10:38 AM
>> To: 'Bruce Williams'
>> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> Subject: RE: OSPF - practice approach
>>
>>
>> Save that question for the proctor. I suspect each test would be
>> different. Aren't you assuming all tests have ospf? Heck you may get
>> ISIS.
>>
>> The short answer is that we don't know, and if we did know, we couldn't
>> tell you.
>>
>> BTW, I do the same thing, it seems to be a standard practice. Here's my
>> routing table from last night's lab.
>>
>> Gateway of last resort is not set
>>
>> 1.0.0.0 0xFFFFFF00 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> C 1.1.1.0 is directly connected, Loopback0
>> 2.0.0.0 0xFFFFFF00 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> D 2.2.2.0 [90/2809856] via 10.1.1.26, 14:30:33, Serial0
>> 3.0.0.0 0xFFFFFF00 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> D 3.3.3.0 [90/2297856] via 10.1.1.2, 14:30:24, Serial1
>> 4.0.0.0 0xFFFFFF00 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> D 4.4.4.0 [90/3321856] via 10.1.1.26, 07:42:02, Serial0
>> 5.0.0.0 0xFFFFFF00 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> D 5.5.5.0 [90/2297856] via 10.1.1.26, 14:30:33, Serial0
>> 6.0.0.0 0xFFFFFF00 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> D 6.6.6.0 [90/3321856] via 10.1.1.2, 07:42:02, Serial1
>> 7.0.0.0 0xFFFFFF00 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> D 7.7.7.0 [90/2809856] via 10.1.1.2, 14:30:24, Serial1
>> 10.0.0.0 0xFFFFFFFC is subnetted, 7 subnets
>> D 10.1.1.8 [90/3193856] via 10.1.1.2, 14:30:24, Serial1
>> D 10.1.1.12 [90/3705856] via 10.1.1.2, 07:42:02, Serial1
>> [90/3705856] via 10.1.1.26, 07:42:02, Serial0
>> C 10.1.1.0 is directly connected, Serial1
>> D 10.1.1.4 [90/2681856] via 10.1.1.2, 14:31:24, Serial1
>> C 10.1.1.24 is directly connected, Serial0
>> D 10.1.1.16 [90/3193856] via 10.1.1.26, 14:31:34, Serial0
>> D 10.1.1.20 [90/2681856] via 10.1.1.26, 14:31:34, Serial0
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>> Bruce Williams
>> Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2002 8:47 AM
>> To: Andre Riscalla; Michael Popovich
>> Cc: Bauer, Rick; 'Jerry Haverkos'; Ademola Osindero;
>> ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> Subject: RE: OSPF - practice approach
>>
>> I know this is a queston for the proctor, but I am curious now. In the
>> lab,
>> do you know if you are allowed to create your own loopbacks and make
>> those
>> loopbacks your router ids. For example, could I create a loopback with
>> addresss 1.1.1.1 for R1 and 2.2.2.2 for R2 etc?
>>
>> Bruce Williams
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
>> Andre Riscalla
>> Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 11:41 PM
>> To: Michael Popovich
>> Cc: Bauer, Rick; 'Jerry Haverkos'; Ademola Osindero;
>> ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> Subject: Re: OSPF - practice approach
>>
>>
>> In that case, i think a good practice is to nail it down and configure a
>> router-id under each and every OSPF process... if it's not otherwise
>> specified in the lab, you can do it.
>>
>> AR-
>>
>> On Wed, 29 May 2002, Michael Popovich wrote:
>>
>> > You'll just need to remember the rules that if you have loopback
>> interfaces
>> > the highest IP wins. If you add them later you'll need to change the
>> > configurations for the virtual link or upon a reboot it is broken.
>> >
>> > MP
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Bauer, Rick" <BAUERR@toysrus.com>
>> > To: "'Jerry Haverkos'" <jhaverkos@columbus.rr.com>; "Ademola Osindero"
>> > <osindero@lagos.sns.slb.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>> > Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 3:34 PM
>> > Subject: RE: OSPF - practice approach
>> >
>> >
>> > > And what happens when you add more loopback interfaces and reload
>> the
>> > > router? What if you have virtual links? Nail it up!
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: Jerry Haverkos [mailto:jhaverkos@columbus.rr.com]
>> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 3:56 PM
>> > > To: Ademola Osindero; ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> > > Subject: RE: OSPF - practice approach
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > A router-id will be picked for you, automatically.
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf
>> Of
>> > > Ademola Osindero
>> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 12:02 PM
>> > > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> > > Subject: OSPF - practice approach
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Hi Group,
>> > >
>> > > I working on approaches of answering ques in the lab. Do I really
>> need
>> to
>> > > put a router id on my routers while configuring OSPF....am I allowed
>> to
>> > > just pick up an ip address and use it?
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > >
>> > > Osindero Ademola
>> > > Schlumberger Network Solutions
>> > > Tel: 234 1 261 0446 Ext 5427
>> > > Fax 234 1 262 1034
>> > > email:osindero@lagos.sns.slb.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 02 2002 - 08:12:21 GMT-3