From: C. Warren (chwarren@xxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Aug 24 2002 - 14:52:03 GMT-3
He may have been using a version of IOS that didn't deal well with
this....
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
> Behalf Of Omer Ansari
> Sent: Saturday, August 24, 2002 8:10 AM
> To: 'Michael Snyder'
> Cc: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> Subject: RE: denying tagged routes when redist'ing into RIP/IGRP
>
>
> confirmed.
>
> Tagged routes are denied.
>
> (hope the stencil comes out ok)
>
> R1-------igrp----R2--igrp-(11.0.0.0/8)---R3
> (e0/0) |
> | |
> | |
> (igrp) (igrp)
> | |
> R5---(ospf)---------//------------------R4
>
>
> igrp routes tagged as 100 when being redist'ed into ospf on R4.
>
> before denying tagged route on R5
> ths is seen on R1:
> 00:41:19: IGRP: received update from 13.1.1.5 on Ethernet0/0
> 00:41:19: network 50.0.0.0, metric 1600 (neighbor 501)
> 00:41:19: network 25.0.0.0, metric 8266 (neighbor 8166)
> 00:41:19: network 11.0.0.0, metric 8266 (neighbor 8166) <----
>
>
>
> after denying the tagged route to be redisted from R5:
>
> on R1:
> 00:43:59: IGRP: received update from 13.1.1.5 on Ethernet0/0
> 00:43:59: network 50.0.0.0, metric 1600 (neighbor 501)
> 00:43:59: network 25.0.0.0, metric 8266 (neighbor 8166)
>
>
> on R5:
> !
> router igrp 10
> redistribute ospf 10 metric 1500 1500 254 1 1500 route-map
> ospf2igrp ... ! route-map ospf2igrp deny 10 match tag 100 !
> route-map ospf2igrp permit 20 !
>
> On Sat, 24 Aug 2002, Omer Ansari wrote:
>
> > Mike,
> >
> > but the igrp or rip process is a recipient, the donor is ospf/eigrp.
> >
> > thus
> > OSPF[tagged]route ----->{route-map TagBoy}----> IGRP
> >
> > I think you should be able to block tagged routes. the redistribute
> > engine from its usage seems to be modular and not part of a routing
> > protocol, as it exhibits the same options/behavior under each RP
> > configuration.
> >
> > I'll verify in lab sometime and confirm. chwarren confirmed that
> > tagged OSPF routes can be denied while redist'ing into RIP.
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Michael Snyder [mailto:msnyder@ldd.net]
> > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 1:22 AM
> > > To: 'Omer Ansari'
> > > Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: RE: denying tagged routes when redist'ing into RIP/IGRP
> > >
> > >
> > > No. My experience is that route maps and tags do not
> work into rip
> > > or igrp.
> > >
> > > An sometimes it doesn't work as expected from rip or igrp.
> > >
> > > If it is just a few routes, a distribute list might be a better
> > > general choice from a rip or igrp route donor.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> > > Of Omer Ansari
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2002 6:14 PM
> > > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: denying tagged routes when redist'ing into RIP/IGRP
> > >
> > > All,
> > >
> > > knowing the IGRP/RIP engine doesnt know how to handle
> tags, is this
> > > allowed or do have to stick with ACLs?
> > >
> > > router igrp 100 (or rip)
> > > redistribute ospf 10 route-map TagBoy metric ......
> > > !
> > > route-map TagBoy deny 10
> > > match tag 90
> > > route-map TagBoy permit 20
> > > !
> > >
> > > regards,
> > > Omer
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:48:36 GMT-3