From: P729 (p729@xxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Jul 02 2002 - 23:59:14 GMT-3
RE: rip summary-addressHmm...flies right into the face of "the RIPv2 summary
having to be in the same major net as the interface," doesn't it? Thanks for
the demo.
Now back to what started this thread: Why didn't it work for Louis? Loopback
vs. Ethernet? IOS versions? Sun spots?
Regards,
Mas Kato
https://ecardfile.com/id/mkato
----- Original Message -----
From: Baety Wayne SrA 18 CS/SCBX
To: 'P729' ; Baety Wayne SrA 18 CS/SCBX ; 'Joerg Kohlenz' ; 'Lab Candidate'
; ccielab@groupstudy.com ; irene.golbery@arche.fr ; louis.krucker@sunrise.net
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 5:16 PM
Subject: RE: rip summary-address
Oh yes, of course. Somehow, I misunderstood what you were asking. Well
here's the results.
BEFORE ip summary-address rip 172.31.0.0 255.255.252.0:
1w1d: RIP: build update entries
1w1d: 172.31.0.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
1w1d: 172.31.1.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
1w1d: 172.31.2.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
1w1d: 172.31.3.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
1w1d: RIP: Update contains 4 routes
AFTER ip summary-address rip 172.31.0.0 255.255.252.0:
1w1d: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via Loopback1 (172.17.5.1)
1w1d: RIP: build update entries
1w1d: 172.31.0.0/22 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
1w1d: RIP: Update contains 1 routes
r4-2514#show ip rip dat
172.17.0.0/16 auto-summary
172.17.5.0/24 directly connected, Loopback1
172.31.0.0/16 auto-summary
172.31.0.0/22 int-summary
172.31.0.0/24 directly connected, Loopback2
172.31.1.0/24 directly connected, Loopback2
172.31.2.0/24 directly connected, Loopback2
172.31.3.0/24 directly connected, Loopback2
r4-2514#show version
Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software
IOS (tm) 2500 Software (C2500-JK8OS-L), Version 12.2(1b), RELEASE SOFTWARE
(fc1)
WAYNE A. BAETY, SRA, MCSE, USAF
18th Communications Squadron
DSN: 634-9927
Commercial: 011 81 611 734 9927
-----Original Message-----
From: P729 [mailto:p729@cox.net]
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 4:42 PM
To: Baety Wayne SrA 18 CS/SCBX; 'Joerg Kohlenz'; 'Lab Candidate';
ccielab@groupstudy.com; irene.golbery@arche.fr; louis.krucker@sunrise.net
Subject: Re: rip summary-address
RE: rip summary-address"As far as the second issue of summarizing on a /22,
RIPv2 isn't a CIDR routing protocol, even though it supports VLSM..."
I agree that RIPv2 doesn't support supernetting unless the supernet already
exists in the routing table, but what I was suggesting was summarizing the
/24
to a /22 instead of all the way to the /16 major net. "Summarizing" net 172
to
anything less than /16 would demand classless (CIDR) support by the routing
protocol.
Regards,
Mas Kato
https://ecardfile.com/id/mkato
----- Original Message -----
From: Baety Wayne SrA 18 CS/SCBX
To: 'Joerg Kohlenz' ; 'P729' ; Baety Wayne SrA 18 CS/SCBX ; 'Lab
Candidate'
; ccielab@groupstudy.com ; irene.golbery@arche.fr ;
louis.krucker@sunrise.net
Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 6:02 PM
Subject: RE: rip summary-address
I never said that you can do a summary on the same interface, the same
interface being the interfaces that are advertising routes of which you are
summarizing. In fact, I was specifically saying that you shouldn't, unless
you are attempting to overcome some kind of split-horizon problem.
In most cases, the newly generated summary address is actually advertised
to
other interfaces, because it is informing other destinations about
information
within the aggregation, and should not be advertised to any interfaces that
form the summary because doing so could lead to routing loops.
As far as the second issue of summarizing on a /22, RIPv2 isn't a CIDR
routing protocol, even though it supports VLSM, so therefore I'd imagine
that
this wouldn't work. Basically, RIPv2 organizes subnet information about a
major network to that same major network and all directly contiguous
interfaces of the major network (it is, however, a feature of RIPv2 to send
subnet information from one major network through other major network
boundaries). It also plays a double role of advertising major networks.
With
RIPv2 and the summary-address feature you are either summarizing groups of
subnet information that will eventually lead to other parts of your network
(that is using the same classful major network), or you are summarizing a
whole major network that you are going to advertise to other networks (that
aren't using the same classful major network).
WAYNE A. BAETY, SRA, MCSE, USAF
18th Communications Squadron
DSN: 634-9927
Commercial: 011 81 611 734 9927
-----Original Message-----
From: Joerg Kohlenz [mailto:j.kohlenz@itknetwork.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 2:24 AM
To: 'P729'; 'Baety Wayne SrA 18 CS/SCBX'; 'Lab Candidate';
ccielab@groupstudy.com; irene.golbery@arche.fr; louis.krucker@sunrise.net
Subject: AW: rip summary-address
hmm..i just not believe that you can do a summarization on the same
interface without a more specific route ???
-----Urspr|ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]Im Auftrag von
P729
Gesendet am: Montag, 1. Juli 2002 09:30
An: Baety Wayne SrA 18 CS/SCBX; 'Lab Candidate'; ccielab@groupstudy.com;
irene.golbery@arche.fr; louis.krucker@sunrise.net
Betreff: Re: rip summary-address
Wayne,
Would you mind trying one more experiment? Try summarizing to a /22
instead
of the major net and see what happens. Just curious...
Regards,
Mas Kato
https://ecardfile.com/id/mkato
----- Original Message -----
From: "Baety Wayne SrA 18 CS/SCBX" <Wayne.Baety@kadena.af.mil>
To: "'Lab Candidate'" <labccie@yahoo.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>;
<irene.golbery@arche.fr>; <louis.krucker@sunrise.net>
Cc: <p729@cox.net>
Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2002 10:28 PM
Subject: RE: rip summary-address
> Of course always test a hypothesis....
>
> interface Loopback1
> ip address 172.17.5.1 255.255.255.0
> ip summary-address rip 172.31.0.0 255.255.0.0
> !
> interface Loopback2
> ip address 172.31.1.1 255.255.255.0
> ip address 172.31.3.1 255.255.255.0 secondary
>
> router rip
> version 2
> passive-interface Loopback2
> network 172.17.0.0
> network 172.31.0.0
> no auto-summary
>
>
> RELEVANT DEBUG OUTPUT before ip summary-address rip:
>
> 1w0d: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via Loopback1 (172.17.5.1)
> 1w0d: RIP: build update entries
> 1w0d: 172.31.1.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
> 1w0d: 172.31.3.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
> 1w0d: RIP: Update contains 2 routes
>
> RELEVANT DEBUG OUTPUT after ip summary-address rip:
>
> 1w0d: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via Loopback1 (172.17.5.1)
> 1w0d: RIP: build update entries
> 1w0d: 172.31.0.0/16 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
> 1w0d: RIP: Update contains 1 routes
>
> ...notice that Loopback1 is not on the same major class net as the
> advertised routes.
>
> I think he's simply just using an old IOS version, haven't seen anything
> about this in the Bug Track.
>
> WAYNE A. BAETY, SRA, MCSE, USAF
> 18th Communications Squadron
> DSN: 634-9927
> Commercial: 011 81 611 734 9927
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lab Candidate [mailto:labccie@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 01, 2002 12:25 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com; irene.golbery@arche.fr;
> louis.krucker@sunrise.net
> Cc: p729@cox.net
> Subject: Re: rip summary-address
>
> What Mas said is correct about the restrictions of RIPv2 summary.
> I'm just wonderring what if you want to summarize multiple routes on the
> same interface.
> On CCO, it states that Each route summarization on an interface must
have
a
> unique major net,
> whether or not the addresses have unique address masks.
> But how can you keep each route summary with unqiue major net and also
share
> the same major net as
> that of the interface it's summarized on?
> Any thoughts?
>
>
>
> In addition to disabling split horizon, the summary address and the
> interface it is being advertised on must share the same major net.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mas Kato
> https://ecardfile.com/id/mkato
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Krucker, Louis" <louis.krucker@sunrise.net>
> To: "'GOLBERY Irhne '" <irene.golbery@arche.fr>;
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2002 9:20 AM
> Subject: RE: rip summary-address
>
>
> > Hello group
> >
> > Heres my config:
> >
> > The goal is to advertse one single route over e0 ( 172.31.0.0 / 16 )
> >
> > This config dont works in my lab, all single routes are advertised
over
> > e0, even if i disable split horizon.
> >
> > Please correct me if i am wrong, may i dont get the point and i must
use
> > another strategy.
> >
> > int e0
> > ip address 172.17.5.1 255.255.255.0
> > ip summary-address rip 172.31.0.0 255.255.0.0
> >
> > int loopback 1
> > ip address 172.31.2.1 255.255.255.0
> >
> > int loopback 2
> > ip address 172.31.3.1 255.255.255.0
> >
> > router rip
> > version 2
> > no auto-summary
> > network 172.17.0.0
> > network 172.31.0.0
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Louis
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: GOLBERY Irhne
> > To: Krucker, Louis; 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> > Sent: 30.06.2002 17:56
> > Subject: RE: rip summary
> >
> >
> > My understanding
> >
> > It is used in Network Access Server context and not for summarisation
> > like
> > we used to do in other routing protocol.
> >
> >
> > Example : 10 remote users connecting to a central router , in order
not
> > to
> > have 10 hosts entry in the routing table of the central router you can
> > use
> > this command to summarize and only have a network or subnet entry in
the
> > RIB
> >
> >
> > Correct me if i am wrong ?
> >
> > Irene
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : Krucker, Louis [mailto:louis.krucker@sunrise.net]
> > Envoyi : dimanche 30 juin 2002 17:13
> > @ : 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> > Objet : rip summary
> >
> >
> > Hi Group
> >
> > I use rip v2 and no auto-summary, how the command ip rip
summary-address
> > will work in this case. I did'nt found a detailed documentation in the
> > archive or at cco.
> >
> > This command does not work in my lab, i try to advertise a summary
> > route.
> > Are there any hints ? Even if i disable split-horizon no summary is
> > advertised. If i look in the rip database the route is there.
> >
> > Thanks for help
> >
> > Louis
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:36:18 GMT-3