From: Bob Sinclair (bsin@erols.com)
Date: Fri Sep 20 2002 - 08:04:12 GMT-3
Jihene,
You may be running into the problem of having two tunnels with the same source and destination. I believe this is not supported. Try this: one tunnel with two addresses (one /27, one /29) using the "secondary" syntax on the second one.
Split horizon problems may result in routes becoming "possibly down". Put a distribute-list out on the the R1 side of the tunnel denying any.
-Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jihene Bouraoui" <BouraouiJ@globalknowledge.net>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 6:14 AM
Subject: igrp redistibution problem, please help
> Hi,
>
> i become crazy with a redistribution problem between ospf and igrp.
>
> R1 ---(/24)----r2---(/24, /27, /29)
>
> I run igrp between R1 and R2 on a subnet /24, and I have to redistribute
> routes subnetted in /24, /27 and /29 learned through ospf on R2, actually,
> rotes in /27 and /29 will not apeear on r1 ans taht's normal,
> so i cerated 2 tunnels between routers, first one in /27 address and second
> one in /29,
> on my R1 RT, i can find /29 routes but no /27 routes, an ip igrp events
> debug shows that the router is receiving packets sourced from R2 /29
> interface on its own /27 interface so packets are invalid.
> this was my fisrt attempt and i don't know why it doesn't work,
> the second solution is to put secondary addresses on R1 and R2 interfaces,
> and here appears another problem: all the routes larned on R1 are /29
> subnetted, even native routes in /24 on R2 and i still don't anderstand
> why.
>
> summary routes and static routes are not allowed, please anyone can help?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Oct 07 2002 - 07:43:58 GMT-3