From: Asim Khan (asimmegawatt@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Aug 02 2002 - 18:32:00 GMT-3
I have just done a lab to check this out. Doyle is
right. If all of your network is in single area than
it is not necessarily be in area 0. Please see the
configuration of the two routers connected back to
back. Outputs are formatted for clarity.
Router1#sh run
Building configuration...
Current configuration:
!
hostname Router1
!
!
ip subnet-zero
no ip domain-lookup
!
!
!
interface Loopback0
ip address 50.1.1.1 255.255.255.0
no ip directed-broadcast
!
interface Serial0
ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.0
no ip directed-broadcast
clockrate 56000
!
!
router ospf 10
network 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 1
network 50.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 1
!
ip classless
!
!
line con 0
logging synchronous
transport input none
line aux 0
line vty 0 4
!
end
Router1#
Router1#sh ip route
Gateway of last resort is not set
50.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C 50.1.1.0 is directly connected, Loopback0
10.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C 10.1.1.0 is directly connected, Serial0
90.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
O 90.1.1.1 [110/65] via 10.1.1.2, 00:02:12,
Serial0
Router1#
Router1#
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----Router2# Router2#sh run Building configuration...
Current configuration: !
hostname Router2 ! ip subnet-zero no ip domain-lookup ! ! interface Loopback0 ip address 90.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 no ip directed-broadcast
! interface Serial0 ip address 10.1.1.2 255.255.255.0 no ip directed-broadcast ! ! router ospf 10 network 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 1 network 90.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 1 ! ip classless ! ! line con 0 logging synchronous transport input none line aux 0 line vty 0 4 ! end
Router2# Router2#sh ip route
Gateway of last resort is not set
50.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets O 50.1.1.1 [110/65] via 10.1.1.1, 00:04:20, Serial0 10.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 10.1.1.0 is directly connected, Serial0 90.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 90.1.1.0 is directly connected, Loopback0 Router2#
--- Leigh Anne Chisholm <lac@applieddesign.net> wrote: > If you have more than one area, you must have an > area 0 as a backbone area. > If you have a network with only one area, it can be > any valid area integer. > > I thought it funky when I first read Doyle's > statement, so I tried it out and > OSPF works just fine in a single-area non-area-zero > network. > > What you need to consider, is whether you'll ever > (through mergers, > acquisitions, corporate growth, network design > requirements, etc.) have need > for a second area. If you may, area 0 is a smart > choice for your single-area > network. > > > -- Leigh Anne > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com > [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of > > Paglia, John (USPC.PCT.Hopewell) > > Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 2:28 PM > > To: 'Asim Khan'; ccielab@groupstudy.com > > Subject: RE: Area 0 > > > > > > You absolutely have to have an area 0. > > > > Pags > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Asim Khan [SMTP:asimmegawatt@yahoo.com] > > > Sent: Friday, August 02, 2002 3:38 PM > > > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com > > > Subject: Area 0 > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I have a quick question, while reading Bruce > Caslow I > > > came across the following statement (page 387) > > > "Every valid OSPF configuration must have an > area 0, > > > so if you use only single OSPF area for your > entire > > > network, it must be area 0". > > > > > > Whereas in Jeff Doyle volume 1 on page 517, it > is > > > written that "Single area does not have to be > area 0". > > > > > > So which one is correct? > > > > > > Regards. > > > > > > Asim Khan > > > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:48:14 GMT-3