From: Jennifer Bellucci (Jennifer_bellucci@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun Dec 22 2002 - 07:59:50 GMT-3
access-list must have at least one permit statement or it becomes deny and
then explicit deny
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sage Vadi" <sagevadi@yahoo.co.uk>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 22, 2002 10:20 AM
Subject: OSPF: distribute-lists
> This is what CCO says:
>
> Q: Can I use the distribute-list in/out command with
> OSPF to filter routes?
>
> A: OSPF routes can't be filtered from entering the
> OSPF database. The distribute-list in command only
> filters routes from entering the routing table, but it
> doesn't prevent link-state packets from being
> propagated.
>
> ~~~ MY PROBLEM ~~~
>
> Diagram:
>
> R1
> |
> R2--R3
>
> R1 learns 160.160.0.0/22 from R2, R2 learns this from
> R3. Fairly simple right?
>
> I want to put a distribute-list inbound on R2's serial
> interface to prevent R1 from learning this
> route/network.
>
> Config on R2 here:
>
> distribute-list 108 in Serial1/0
> access-list 108 deny ip 160.160.0.0 0.0.3.255 any
>
> Problem:
>
> R1 still has the route in it's routing table!!! Doh!
> CCO says it should not be in the routing table, but it
> should be in the OSPF database.
>
> Q) Any tips/help/suggestions?
>
> rgds,
> Sage
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> http://uk.my.yahoo.com
> .
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 17:21:51 GMT-3