From: Carlos G Mendioroz (tron@huapi.ba.ar)
Date: Thu Oct 03 2002 - 07:58:13 GMT-3
All,
what's wrong with two VLs ?
This would actually make R12 an ABR (it is not unless
it has a link in the backbone). Then it will do (if it
is the best path, which I would guess is the case)
route between areas 1 & 2.
Jason Sinclair wrote:
>
> Howard,
>
> I agree - makes much more sense design wise and will actually work as
> expected.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jason Sinclair CCIE #9100
> Manager, Network Control Centre
> POWERTEL
> 55 Clarence Street,
> SYDNEY NSW 2000
> AUSTRALIA
> office: + 61 2 8264 3820
> mobile: + 61 416 105 858
> email: sinclairj@powertel.com.au
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:hcb@gettcomm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 3 October 2002 10:10
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: OSPF Design
>
> At 9:49 AM +1000 10/3/02, Jason Sinclair wrote:
> >I would not call this design as such, however this could be configured via
> >the use of two virtual links to area 0 via the other two respective areas.
>
> Mea culpa, Jason. Let me suggest a compromise that does force an ABR
> area 0.0.0.0 connection, but doesn't send this traffic over it unless
> the primary link fails.
>
> What I usually do in a case like this is define a static route(s)
> between the endpoints, give it an administrative distance lower than
> OSPF's, and ABSOLUTELY NOT REDISTRIBUTE IT INTO OSPF. That way,
> traffic will take the preferred path as long as it's up, but will use
> area 0.0.0.0 as backup if there is a primary path failure.
>
> >au
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:hcb@gettcomm.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, 3 October 2002 04:28
> >To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >Subject: Re: OSPF Design
> >
> >At 1:51 PM -0400 10/2/02, Peter Wodle wrote:
> >>I wonder if the following OSPF Design is valid/workable?
> >>
> >>Have the area 0 with a no of routers. 1 ABR links area 0 to Area 1.
> >>another ABR links area 0 to Area 2. So far no issues. But then we
> >>have R12 that connects area 1 & area 2 togather i.e. R12 has one
> >>interface in area 1 and one one interface in area 2. R12 has no
> >>interface in area 0. So, it is an ABR (right?) but has no link to
> >>area 0. Could this could lead to area 1 & area 2 exhange routes via
> >>this "backdoor" router?R12
> >>
> >>Can we do this? I can see it is bad design but...
> >
> >Not in the present standard or most (if not all) Cisco
> >implementations. There is a proposal in the IETF OSPF Working Group
> >to do something close to it:
> >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ospf-mlinks-03.txt
> >
> >
> >**********************************************************************
> >PowerTel Limited, winners of
> >Best Corporate/Wholesale Broadband Initiative, Australian Telecom Awards
> 2002
> >Broadband Wholesale Carrier of the year, CommsWorld Telecomms Awards 2001
> >Best Emerging Telco, Australian Telecom Awards 2001
> >
> >**********************************************************************
> >This email (including all attachments) is intended solely for the named
> >addressee. It is confidential and may contain commercially sensitive
> >information. If you receive it in error, please let us know by reply email,
> >delete it from your system and destroy any copies.
> >
> >This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be
> reproduced,
> >adapted or transmitted without the prior written consent of the
> >copyright owner.
> >
> >Emails may be interfered with, may contain computer viruses or other
> defects
> >and may not be successfully replicated on other systems. We give no
> >warranties in relation to these matters. If you have any doubts about
> >the authenticity of an email purportedly sent by us, please contact us
> >immediately.
> >
> >**********************************************************************
>
> **********************************************************************
> PowerTel Limited, winners of
> Best Corporate/Wholesale Broadband Initiative, Australian Telecom Awards 2002
> Broadband Wholesale Carrier of the year, CommsWorld Telecomms Awards 2001
> Best Emerging Telco, Australian Telecom Awards 2001
>
> **********************************************************************
> This email (including all attachments) is intended solely for the named
> addressee. It is confidential and may contain commercially sensitive
> information. If you receive it in error, please let us know by reply email,
> delete it from your system and destroy any copies.
>
> This email is also subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced,
> adapted or transmitted without the prior written consent of the copyright owner.
>
> Emails may be interfered with, may contain computer viruses or other defects
> and may not be successfully replicated on other systems. We give no
> warranties in relation to these matters. If you have any doubts about
> the authenticity of an email purportedly sent by us, please contact us
> immediately.
>
> **********************************************************************
-- Carlos G Mendioroz <tron@huapi.ba.ar> LW7 EQI Argentina
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Nov 05 2002 - 08:35:37 GMT-3