From: esther (esther1616@hanmail.net)
Date: Fri Oct 04 2002 - 02:32:18 GMT-3
Yes, that's the point.
I missed simple one as usual :)
Thanks a lot.
---------[ 9^@: 8^@O 3;?k ]----------
> Title : Re: rip network problem
> Date : Thu, 3 Oct 2002 15:04:41 +0200 (CEST)
> From : Ayman Hamza
> To : esther1616@hanmail.net, donny.mateo@sg.ca-indosuez.com
> Cc : ccielab@groupstudy.com, nobody@groupstudy.com
>
>
>
> Donny, Esther;
>
> THe ethernet interface ethernet 0/1 is passive in R3 configuration!!!!!
>
> So this is normal no RIP routes is being sent from R3 to R2
>
> -Ayman
>
> > From nobody@groupstudy.com Thu Oct 3 13:59:58 2002
> > Subject: Re: rip network problem
> > To: "esther"
> > Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com, nobody@groupstudy.com
> > From: "Donny MATEO"
> > Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 19:47:12 +0800
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > X-ASK-Info: Whitelist match
> > Sender: nobody@groupstudy.com
> > Reply-To: "Donny MATEO"
> >
> > Esther,
> >
> > what version of RIP are you using. If you were using version 1 can
you provide us with the ip
> > address on each interface.
> > I can only see from your debug that r2 is sending one update to r3
and that router 3 received the
> > update from r2.
> >
> > As for the part of r 3 passing the update to router 2 I don't see
that.
> > I see r3 passing six update routes to interface e0/0 to 150.100.2.254
while router 2 is at
> > 150.100.1.4 on interface 0/1, so it didn't pass the update to r2. at
least not indicated by the
> > debug.
> > Do a clear ip route * and see if you can catch the update on r3's
e0/1.
> >
> > cant see anything else other than that. Perhaps others have something
to add to that.
> >
> > Donny
> >
> >
> >
> > "esther"
> >
> > il.net> cc:
> > Sent by: Subject: rip network problem
> > nobody@groupstudy
> > .com
> >
> >
> > 03-10-2002 19:09
> > Please respond to
> > "esther"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I enabled RIP and eBGP between R2 and R3.
> >
> > R1 -- (ospf) -- R2 --- (ether / RIP) --- R3
> >
> > The several rip and bgp networks are generated using the loopback
> > interfaces in the R3. And between R2 and R3, rip and eBGP are
configured.
> >
> > Strange thing, the R2 received the bgp routes from R3 normally.
> > but, it doesn't receive the rip routes from R3.
> > To check it, I enabled the debug (debug ip rip event) in the R2, and
I am
> > awared of the R2 doesn't receive the rip update from R3 as belows.
> >
> > < debug on R2 >
> > 01:50:09: RIP: Update queued
> > 01:50:09: RIP: Update sent via Ethernet0
> > 01:50:38: RIP: sending v1 update to 255.255.255.255 via Ethernet0
> > (150.100.1.4)
> > 01:50:38: RIP: Update contains 1 routes
> > 01:50:38: RIP: Update queued
> > 01:50:38: RIP: Update sent via Ethernet0
> >
> > Rack02-BB#
> > 00:24:18: RIP: received v1 update from 150.100.1.4 on Ethernet0/1
> > 00:24:18: RIP: Update contains 1 routes
> > 00:24:30: RIP: sending v1 update to 255.255.255.255 via Ethernet0/0
> > (150.100.2.254)
> > 00:24:30: RIP: Update contains 6 routes
> >
> > what's wong with below config and is there any remarkable point?
> >
> > R3#sh run | be router rip
> > router rip
> > passive-interface Ethernet0/1
> > network 150.100.0.0
> > network 192.168.2.0
> > network 192.168.3.0
> > network 192.168.4.0
> > network 192.168.5.0
> > !
> >
> > R2#sh run | be router rip
> > router rip
> > redistribute ospf 2 metric 5
> > network 150.100.0.0
> > !
> >
> > Which case deliver this situation ??
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> >
> > Esther.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [TABLE NOT SHOWN]
> >
> > [TABLE NOT SHOWN][TABLE NOT SHOWN][IMAGE]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This message is for information purposes only and its content
> > should not be construed as an offer, or solicitation of an offer,
> > to buy or sell any banking or financial instruments or services
> > and no representation or warranty is given in respect of its
> > accuracy, completeness or fairness. The material is subject
> > to change without notice. You should take your own independent
> > tax, legal and other professional advice in respect of the content
> > of this message. This message may contain confidential or
> > legally privileged material and may not be copied, redistributed
> > or published (in whole or in part) without our prior written consent.
> > This email may have been intercepted, partially destroyed,
> > arrive late, incomplete or contain viruses and no liability is
> > accepted by any member of the Credit Agricole Indosuez group
> > as a result. If you are not the intended recipient of this message,
> > please immediately notify the sender and delete this message
> > from your computer.
> >
>
[TABLE NOT SHOWN]
[TABLE NOT SHOWN][TABLE NOT SHOWN][IMAGE]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Nov 05 2002 - 08:35:38 GMT-3