From: Peter van Oene (pvo@usermail.com)
Date: Wed Apr 02 2003 - 09:14:40 GMT-3
At 10:33 AM 4/2/2003 +0100, McCallum, Robert wrote:
>http://ring.aist.go.jp/pub/doc/RFC/authors/rfc3509.txt
Thanks Robert.
I guess the alt-abr draft made it to RFC. I hadn't seen that nor is the
rfc available in the normal stores. Thanks for the link.
Pete
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Peter van Oene [mailto:pvo@usermail.com]
> > Sent: 01 April 2003 19:21
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: OSPF areas
> >
> >
> > At 08:12 AM 4/1/2003 -0800, groupstudy@bekmezian.com wrote:
> > >Based on my research, there is no such thing as RFC 3509.
> > >
> > >http://www.ietf.org/iesg/1rfc_index.txt
> > >
> > >To answer your question, those two areas will not exchange
> > routes without
> > >some kind of redistribution.
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >
> > >George Bekmezian
> > >CCIE# 10704
> >
> > I am also not aware of a 3509, but the below draft has long discussed
> > alternatives for non zero ABR functionality. I am not sure
> > if anyone has
> > code for it however.
> >
> > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ospf-abr-alt-05.txt
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >"Nawaz, Ajaz" <Ajaz.Nawaz@bskyb.com>
> > >Sent by: nobody@groupstudy.com
> > >04/01/2003 06:51 AM
> > >Please respond to
> > >"Nawaz, Ajaz" <Ajaz.Nawaz@bskyb.com>
> > >
> > >
> > >To
> > >"'McCallum, Robert'" <Robert.McCallum@let-it-be-thus.com>, "'Ccielab'
> > >(E-mail)" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > >cc
> > >
> > >Subject
> > >RE: OSPF areas
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >using one ospf process per abr ?
> > >
> > >
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: McCallum, Robert [mailto:Robert.McCallum@let-it-be-thus.com]
> > >Sent: 01 April 2003 13:19
> > >To: 'Ccielab' (E-mail)
> > >Subject: OSPF areas
> > >
> > >
> > >Folks,
> > >
> > >Just been reading RFC3509 which clearly states that you do
> > not need to
> > >have
> > >all ospf router areas attaching to the backbone area i.e.
> > you can attach
> > >area 1 and area 2 direct and traffic will flow through this
> > link (without
> > >the use of a virtual link). Has anyone out there actually configured
> > >this,
> > >or has anyone found anything on the cisco website relating to this.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Robert McCallum CCIE #8757
> > >
> > >
> > >.
> > >
> > >
> > >*************************************************************
> > *********
> > >Information in this email is confidential and may be privileged.
> > >It is intended for the addressee only. If you have received
> > it in error,
> > >please notify the sender immediately and delete it from your system.
> > >You should not otherwise copy it, retransmit it or use or
> > disclose its
> > >contents to anyone.
> > >Thank you for your co-operation.
> > >*************************************************************
> > *********
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu May 01 2003 - 13:35:45 GMT-3