From: Don (seadon@attbi.com)
Date: Mon Nov 11 2002 - 15:52:20 GMT-3
It would only help for the case of two directly connected routers as in this
example, but wouldn't it work if you added "network 150.50.0.0" to both rip
routers? Without that statement, you are not even attempting to advertise
those routes. I must admit I haven't tested it myself. Seems that if you
change rip to version 2 it might fix the more general case of non directly
connected routers, too.
Don
----- Original Message -----
From: <Sam.MicroGate@usa.telekom.de>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 9:59 AM
Subject: RIP version one
> Hello everyone,
>
> I have two routers, R1 and R2, connected together through a serial
> interface. The configuration of the two routers area stated below. In R2,
I
> can not ping the loopback interfaces of R1. The reason of this because R2
is
> receiving a summary address at the network boundary, 150.50.0.0/16.
> Therefore R2 would install the route with the longest match and lower
> administrative distance which is 150.50.2.2/32 in its routing table and
> ignore 150.50.0.0/16. Any remedy for this problem? Please include a sample
> config. If you can. Thanks.
>
>
> R1:
>
> Interface serial 0
> Ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
>
> Interface loopback 0
> Ip address 150.50.10.1 255.255.255.255
>
> Interface loopback 1
> Ip address 150.50.11.1 255.255.255.255
>
> Router rip
> Redistribute connected metric 5
> Network 192.168.1.0
>
>
> R2:
> Interface serial 0
> Ip address 192.168.1.2 255.255.255.0
>
> Interface loopback 0
> Ip address 150.50.2.2 255.255.255.255
>
> Router rip
> Network 192.168.1.0
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Dec 03 2002 - 07:22:56 GMT-3