From: Mingzhou Nie (mnie@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Aug 18 2002 - 23:06:00 GMT-3
I tried myself. Initially, I got your results. But after doing either
one of these, routers on r11 show as expected.
- remove ospf process 10 on r11, and add back process 1
- remove "redis igrp 10 subnets" on r10, and add it back
r11#show ip route
Codes: C - connected, S - static, I - IGRP, R - RIP, M - mobile, B -
BGP
D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area
N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2
E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2, E - EGP
i - IS-IS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2, ia - IS-IS
inter area
* - candidate default, U - per-user static route, o - ODR
P - periodic downloaded static route
Gateway of last resort is not set
172.16.0.0/24 is subnetted, 5 subnets
O E2 172.16.4.0 [110/20] via 172.16.5.2, 00:01:47, Ethernet0/0
C 172.16.5.0 is directly connected, Ethernet0/0
D 172.16.1.0 [90/307200] via 172.16.5.2, 00:01:39, Ethernet0/0
O E2 172.16.2.0 [110/20] via 172.16.5.2, 00:01:48, Ethernet0/0
O E2 172.16.3.0 [110/20] via 172.16.5.2, 00:01:47, Ethernet0/0
r11#
--- "Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE)" <dmitry_volkov@ca.ml.com> wrote:
> OK guys,
>
> .100, .111 and .222 - are loopbacks on R11 - It's irrelevant.
> I just forgot to remove it from previous test :)
> Yesterday when I got this problem I didn't have these loopbacks.
>
> Ok, I removed any feedback from the picture and left only one-way
> redist on
> R10:
> Now R9---(igrp)---R10(redist IGRP-->OSPF,EIGRP)---R11 (OSPF, EIGRP)
>
> The result is the same !!! D EX routes on R11.
> (I even reload routers :o)
>
> router eigrp 10
> network 172.16.0.0
> !
> router ospf 10
> redistribute igrp 10 subnets
> network 172.16.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> network 172.16.5.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> !
> router igrp 10
> no redistribute eigrp 10
> passive-interface Ethernet1/0
> network 172.16.0.0
>
> 172.16.0.0/24 is subnetted, 8 subnets
> C 172.16.222.0 is directly connected, Loopback2
> D EX 172.16.4.0 [170/435200] via 172.16.5.2, 00:00:21, Ethernet0
> C 172.16.5.0 is directly connected, Ethernet0
> D 172.16.1.0 [90/307200] via 172.16.5.2, 00:00:21, Ethernet0
> D EX 172.16.2.0 [170/435200] via 172.16.5.2, 00:00:21, Ethernet0
> D EX 172.16.3.0 [170/435200] via 172.16.5.2, 00:00:21, Ethernet0
> C 172.16.111.0 is directly connected, Loopback1
> C 172.16.100.0 is directly connected, Loopback0
> r11#sh ip ei
> r11#sh ip ospf nei
>
> Neighbor ID Pri State Dead Time Address
> Interface
> 172.16.5.2 1 FULL/DR 00:00:36 172.16.5.2
> Ethernet0
> r11#sh ip ospf data
>
> OSPF Router with ID (172.16.222.1) (Process ID 10)
>
>
> Router Link States (Area 0)
>
> Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum Link
> count
> 172.16.5.2 172.16.5.2 53 0x80000002 0xC778 2
> 172.16.222.1 172.16.222.1 52 0x80000002 0x1538 4
>
> Net Link States (Area 0)
>
> Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum
> 172.16.5.2 172.16.5.2 53 0x80000001 0x133F
>
> Type-5 AS External Link States
>
> Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum Tag
> 172.16.1.0 172.16.5.2 263 0x80000001 0x9589 0
> 172.16.2.0 172.16.5.2 145 0x80000001 0xD18D 0
> 172.16.3.0 172.16.5.2 145 0x80000001 0xC697 0
> 172.16.4.0 172.16.5.2 145 0x80000001 0xBBA1 0
> 172.16.5.0 172.16.5.2 263 0x80000001 0x69B1 0
> r11#sh ip eig
> r11#sh ip eigrp top
> IP-EIGRP Topology Table for AS(10)/ID(172.16.222.1)
>
> Codes: P - Passive, A - Active, U - Update, Q - Query, R - Reply,
> r - reply Status, s - sia Status
>
> P 172.16.222.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 128256
> via Connected, Loopback2
> P 172.16.4.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 435200
> via 172.16.5.2 (435200/409600), Ethernet0
> P 172.16.5.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 281600
> via Connected, Ethernet0
> P 172.16.1.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 307200
> via 172.16.5.2 (307200/281600), Ethernet0
> P 172.16.2.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 435200
> via 172.16.5.2 (435200/409600), Ethernet0
> P 172.16.3.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 435200
> via 172.16.5.2 (435200/409600), Ethernet0
> P 172.16.111.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 128256
> via Connected, Loopback1
> P 172.16.100.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 128256
> via Connected, Loopback0
> r11#
> ==========
>
> Dmitry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mingzhou Nie [mailto:mnie@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 5:11 PM
> To: Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE); 'yakout yakout'; Colin Barber
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Are EIGRP external routes preferable than OSPF ext ??
>
>
> just curious. Which router is 172.16.222.1. and where do
> > 172.16.100.0 172.16.5.2 119 0x80000001 0xCB2D 0
> > 172.16.111.0 172.16.5.2 119 0x80000001 0x529B 0
> > 172.16.222.0 172.16.5.2 120 0x80000001 0x88F5 0
> come from?
>
> You must have another router hanging in OSPF.
>
> --- "Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE)" <dmitry_volkov@ca.ml.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Tried to put the same config again.
> > At the beginning I got the same as Yakout, but after clear ip ro *
> on
> > R11
> > I got D EX routes.
> >
> > Colin is right.
> > If we change eigrp internal distance on R11 higher than 110
> > everything seems
> > to be OK on R11
> > Yakout, there is nothing wrong with OSPF adjacencies betw R10 &
> R11.
> > I have 12.1(16) on R9 and R11 and 12.0(23) on R10
> >
> > And again If I remove OSPF from E0/0 on R10 (172.16.1.2 faced to
> R9)
> > -
> > Everything is OK on R11 (only O E2) Why ??
> >
> > r11#sh ip ospf nei
> >
> > Neighbor ID Pri State Dead Time Address
> > Interface
> > 172.16.5.2 1 FULL/BDR 00:00:31 172.16.5.2
> > Ethernet0
> > r11#sh ip ospf data
> >
> > OSPF Router with ID (172.16.222.1) (Process ID 10)
> >
> >
> > Router Link States (Area 0)
> >
> > Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum
> Link
> > count
> > 172.16.5.2 172.16.5.2 138 0x80000002 0xBD83 2
> > 172.16.222.1 172.16.222.1 137 0x80000004 0xE269 4
> >
> > Net Link States (Area 0)
> >
> > Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum
> > 172.16.5.1 172.16.222.1 137 0x80000001 0xCAAF
> >
> > Type-5 AS External Link States
> >
> > Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum Tag
> > 172.16.1.0 172.16.5.2 146 0x80000001 0x9589 0
> > 172.16.2.0 172.16.5.2 143 0x80000001 0xD18D 0
> > 172.16.3.0 172.16.5.2 143 0x80000001 0xC697 0
> > 172.16.4.0 172.16.5.2 143 0x80000001 0xBBA1 0
> > 172.16.5.0 172.16.5.2 146 0x80000001 0x69B1 0
> > 172.16.100.0 172.16.5.2 119 0x80000001 0xCB2D 0
> > 172.16.111.0 172.16.5.2 119 0x80000001 0x529B 0
> > 172.16.222.0 172.16.5.2 120 0x80000001 0x88F5 0
> >
> >
> > Dmitry
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: yakout yakout [mailto:yesmat@iprimus.com.au]
> > Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 8:04 AM
> > To: Colin Barber; Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE);
> > ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: Are EIGRP external routes preferable than OSPF ext ??
> >
> >
> > Gents,
> >
> > It is got to work as expected. you should be able to see O E2 route
> > coming
> > from R9.
> >
> > Maybe your OSPF neigbors are not forming.
> >
> > I just tested it and it works as expected.
> >
> > Yakout
> > #9893
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf
> > Of
> > Colin Barber
>
=== message truncated ===
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:48:28 GMT-3