From: Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE) (dmitry_volkov@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Aug 27 2002 - 23:33:13 GMT-3
By the way -
tunnels with IGRP - is one of cisco's recommended solutions
when You have Discontiguous network in IGRP domain (Faraz Shamim
"Troubleshooting IP routing protocols" ciscopress p156-158)
137.99.2.0/24--R1(e0)---131.108.1.0/24---(e0)R2---137.99.3.0/24
R1#
int tu 0
ip address 137.99.1.1 255.255.255.0
tunnel source eth 0
tunnel dest 131.108.1.2
R2#
int tu 0
ip address 137.99.1.2 255.255.255.0
tunnel source eth 0
tunnel dest 131.108.1.1
Dmitry
-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Shah [mailto:nshah@connect.com.au]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 10:19 PM
To: Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE); ccielab@groupstudy.com; Putti
Dhamrongsirivadh
Subject: Re: ip rip send version 1 2
not exactly, but you can have something like this...
R1.
Int loop0
ip address 140.142.1.0/26
int s0
ip address 140.142.2.1/24
Connected to R2
R2.
Int loop0
ip addr 140.142.3.0/26
int s0
ip addr 140.142.2.2/24
The / 26's will not be conveyed from R1 to R2, if running IGRP, so create a
tunnel with a different major network or a /26 mask (same major network)
with source as the /24 interfaces on both the ends, but apply the addresses
as I suggested above.
rgds
Nick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Putti Dhamrongsirivadh" <putti@ait.co.th>
To: "Nick Shah" <nshah@connect.com.au>; "Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE)"
<dmitry_volkov@ca.ml.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 1:58 AM
Subject: Re: ip rip send version 1 2
> Hi
>
> Do you guys have a sample config of igrp with tunneling?
>
> rgds
> putti
>
>
> At 11:41 AM 8/28/2002 +1000, Nick Shah wrote:
> >Yes, it can be considered a valid solution 'without enabling RIPv2'.
> >
> >On a side note, My observation is that RIP is much more flexible with the
> >way you can inject VLSM into it.
> >Secondary addressing etc. also works like a charm.
> >IGRP is a ****, the only perfect way to make it talk vlsm is by tunnels.
> >
> >rgds
> >Nick
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE)" <dmitry_volkov@ca.ml.com>
> >To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 9:28 AM
> >Subject: ip rip send version 1 2
> >
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The following setup: (e0)R1(s1)---(rip)----(s0)R2
> > > r1#
> > > interface e0
> > > ip address 142.146.10.129 255.255.255.192
> > >
> > > interface s1
> > > ip rip send version 1 2
> > > ip address 142.146.1.10 255.255.255.0
> > >
> > > router rip
> > > network 146.142.0.0
> > >
> > > r2#
> > > interface s0
> > > ip address 142.146.1.7 255.255.255.0
> > >
> > > router rip
> > > network 146.142.0.0
> > > r2#sh ip ro
> > > Gateway of last resort is not set
> > >
> > > 142.146.0.0/16 is variably subnetted, 2 subnets, 2 masks
> > > C 142.146.1.0/24 is directly connected, Serial0
> > > R 142.146.10.128/26 [120/1] via 142.146.1.10, 00:00:22, Serial0
> > > C 133.7.7.0 is directly connected, Loopback0
> > > C 133.7.56.0 is directly connected, Ethernet0
> > >
> > >
> > > Router 2 has RIP network /26 in his RT - acting as VLSM router
> > >
> > > So without any V2 related configuration on R2 and by enabling send v2
> > > updates on R1 we can make R2 to get any mask from R1
> > > What do You think: Can it be valid Lab solution classless/classfull
redist
> > > if R1 is redistr point? there is no any V2 configs on R2 :)
> > >
> > > Looks like RIP is capable to get both V1 and V2 updates by default.
> > >
> > > Dmitry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:48:39 GMT-3