From: Joe Chang (changjoe@earthlink.net)
Date: Thu Dec 05 2002 - 15:59:35 GMT-3
If you get a chance to repeat this experiment, try clearing out the summary
routes from the table after you switch to v2.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Martin" <jmartin@capitalpremium.net>
To: "Geralt Omhof" <geralt@OmnIT.nl>; "CCIE GroupStudy"
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 2:50 PM
Subject: RE: RIP Auto-summary
> RIP Auto-summaryOriginally, yes, I was using v1. I was just testing RIP =
> behaviors. I have discontiguous subnets. I knew this would not work =
> with RIP v1. I just wanted to see what the debugs looked like. Then I =
> switched to v2 and the summary routes remained even after a reload.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geralt Omhof [mailto:geralt@OmnIT.nl]
> Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 11:45 AM
> To: Joe Martin
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: RIP Auto-summary
>
>
> My guess is you're using version 1.....=20
>
> Geralt
> -----Original Message-----=20
> From: Joe Martin [mailto:jmartin@capitalpremium.net]=20
> Sent: Thu 12/5/2002 6:32 PM=20
> To: CCIE GroupStudy=20
> Cc:=20
> 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
>
> [GroupStudy.com removed an attachment of type application/ms-tnef which
had a name of winmail.dat]
> .
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 17:21:39 GMT-3