From: Hedi Abdelkafi (Hedi.Abdelk@simac.lu)
Date: Thu Oct 31 2002 - 10:40:51 GMT-3
Hi,
First, thanks for your help.
Sorry, but I don't understand.
Why, if R2 apply the /24 to the 192 route, R1 don't receive it ?
If I understand what you said before, R2 apply the normal subnet mask to the 192 netwoork (/24) and send the update
to R1. In that case, I sohuld receive the following route 192.0.0.0/24.
Why that route is not send to R1 ?
What's the logical way ?
Thanks fou your help.
Here's the content of the rip Database on R2
R2-2503DOWN#sh ip rip database
133.7.0.0/16 auto-summary
...
160.100.0.0/16 auto-summary
160.100.0.0/16 redistributed
[5] via 133.7.7.7,
192.0.0.0/8 redistributed
[5] via 133.7.7.7,
The same on R1
R1#sh ip rip database
133.7.0.0/16 auto-summary
...
160.100.0.0/16 auto-summary
160.100.0.0/16
[5] via 133.7.23.2, 00:00:13, Serial0
-----Original Message-----
From: thunai@netsol.co.in [mailto:thunai@netsol.co.in]
Sent: jeudi 31 octobre 2002 13:01
To: Hedi Abdelkafi
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: FLSM to VLSM redistribution problem
Hai
unless r1 and r2 is running rip ver 2 , u will not ba able to
achive this. The reason is r1 is no way aware of the subnet mask information
of that route ( Rip v1 will not send subnet mask information ). So its r2
itself will summarize to its major boundry and send it .. so 160 class B
network u will get is as /16 and 192 class c get it as /24
regds
thunai
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hedi Abdelkafi [SMTP:Hedi.Abdelk@simac.lu]
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 3:54 PM
> To: GroupStudy (E-mail)
> Subject: FLSM to VLSM redistribution problem
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a problem with redistribution from OSPF into RIP.
> Here's the topology
>
> R1---RIP---R2---OSPF AREA0---R3---OSPF AREA 10
>
> Network between R1 and R2 : 133.7.23.0/24
> Network between R2 and R3 : 133.7.147.0/24
>
> On R3, the following loopback interfaces are configured (these loopback
> are redistributed into the OSPF process) :
> loop 1 : 160.100.100.1/24
> loop 2 : 160.100.128.1/24
> loop 3 : 192.190.100.1/24
> loop 4 : 192.190.101.1/24
> loop 5 : 192.190.102.1/24
>
> I would like that loop 1 and 2 appears as a single route.
> The same for loopback 3,4 and 5.
>
> On R3, I use the following command to create the summary route
> summary-address 192.190.0.0 255.255.0.0
> summary-address 160.100.0.0 255.255.0.0
>
> These summary appears, as expected, on R2.
> Now, I redistribute OSPF into RIP on R2.
>
> On R1, I can only see the 160.100.0.0/16 route !
> Why I cannot see the 192.190.0.0/16 route ?
>
> It is because the redistributed route has not it's normal subnet mask /24
> ??
>
> Thanks for your help.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Nov 05 2002 - 08:36:01 GMT-3