From: cebuano (cebu2ccie@cox.net)
Date: Mon Dec 30 2002 - 11:57:26 GMT-3
Jay,
Remember that an Adjacency is a stage that OSPF establishes as a
precursor to hopefully be able to exchange LSA info. Doyle vol.1 has
very good coverage on the whole process. This is just a stage to
determine which neighbors the router will exchange LSA info. If you
review the requirements on what determines an adjacency, that should
give you the first clue.
HTH,
Elmer
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Carlos
Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 10:42 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: ospf network-type mismatch
Jay,
My interpretation of this problem is based on the understanding that
even if
adj is formed , if there is a discrepency in the database the route is
not
installed in the routing table. A good explanation of this is given at
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/104/26.html
Carlos
Telecom New Zealand - Advanced Solutions Group : Network Design and
Security
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay Greenberg" <groupstudylist@execulink.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 1:04 PM
Subject: ospf network-type mismatch
> I was under the impression that even if there was an ospf network-type
> mismatch between routers, changing the hello/dead timers would allow
you
> to form an adjacency and learn routes.
>
> However, I found that between an NMBA network-type and a
point-to-point
> network, I was able to form an adjacency by adjusting the timers on
one
> of the routers. **Adjacencies are formed**, but neither router will
> install any OSPF database content into the RT.
>
> As soon as I changed the network-type on one router to match the
other,
> all routes popped into the RT.
>
> I couldn't find any documentation on this phenomenon. Please comment.
> .
.
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 17:21:54 GMT-3