From: MOLINA, MARTIN J (PBI) (mm1343@sbc.com)
Date: Thu Dec 05 2002 - 15:59:46 GMT-3
Interesting. I have a bad habit of relying on the route table as opposed to
the database. As a result, I haven't spent much time reviewing the database.
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Martin [mailto:jmartin@capitalpremium.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 10:54 AM
To: MOLINA, MARTIN J (PBI); CCIE GroupStudy
Subject: RE: RIP Auto-summary
I was running v1 with discontiguous subnets just to see what the debugs
would look like. I knew this would not work. Then I switched to v2 and the
discontiguous subnets show up in the RIP database, but so do the summary
routes, even after a reload.
-----Original Message-----
From: MOLINA, MARTIN J (PBI) [mailto:mm1343@sbc.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 11:45 AM
To: 'Joe Martin'; CCIE GroupStudy
Subject: RE: RIP Auto-summary
This might be a silly question but are you running RIP Version 2 ?
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Martin [mailto:jmartin@capitalpremium.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 9:32 AM
To: CCIE GroupStudy
Subject: RIP Auto-summary
Why, if I enter the "no auto-summary" command under the RIP process, do I
still have summary routes at the classful boundary in the RIP database?
Maybe just a total brain fart? What am I missing?
Thanks,
Joe Martin
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 17:21:39 GMT-3