From: Jaroslaw Zak (jaroslawz@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Oct 24 2002 - 11:09:16 GMT-3
As far as I remember when you define area as "stub" and "stub no-summary" in
both cases you get 0.0.0.0 injected in.
While when you create "nssa" and "nssa no-summary", only in last case you
get your default in. Therefore you would need
"default-information-originate" option for "nssa" type area, if you wish to
have 0.0.0.0 route propagated within.
I wonder if I remember it right... :)
Regards
Jarek
>From: Peter van Oene <pvo@usermail.com>
>Reply-To: Peter van Oene <pvo@usermail.com>
>To: "'ccielab@groupstudy.com'" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: Re: nssa no-summary question
>Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 09:02:52 -0400
>
>At 05:26 PM 10/23/2002 -0500, Wright, Jeremy wrote:
>>i have area 100 setup as a "nssa no-summary" between r1 and r2. on the
>>other
>>side of r1 is area 0. r1 dumps a default route down to r2 because of the
>>no-summary argument. would there be any reason to use
>>default-information-originate in this scenario? thanks
>
>Might be some need to control which of type 3 or 7 LSA's are used for the
>summary route. NSSA no-summary might send a 7 with def originate sending a
>3, but I'm rusty here and would need to check. 3's are better than 7's and
>thus you might be sending a default that is not preferred when actually
>wanted it to be. Juniper lets you control this and I expect Cisco might as
>well, but I haven't played with it recently.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Nov 05 2002 - 08:35:56 GMT-3