From: Stuart Reabow (stuartbr@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Nov 28 2003 - 13:20:30 GMT-3
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/tech/tk364/tk871/technologies_tech_note09
186a0080093fd8.shtml
And
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/tech/tk365/tk207/technologies_tech_note09
186a0080093fd9.shtml
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of John
Underhill
Sent: 28 November 2003 16:09
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Redistributing summaries into rip
I was stuck on a problem yesterday, maybe someone has an idea..
RIP --- OSPF area0 --area1 --- RIP
Four rip routes were summarized on the first rip network to 192.168.0.0/22
and reditributed into ospf, as soon as the summary is applied, routes that
were appearing in the second rip domain began to age out, (as expected). I
tried creating a static route on the asbr and redistributing that into the
second rip domain, but it doesn't show up, so I tried a secondary address
with a /22 bit mask between the asbr and the rip router and added that to
rip, same, tried a tunnel, still the summary doesn't show up in the
secondary rip domain.
The only way I could make it work was by either adding 4 static routes to
ospf, or advertising a default route into the rip domain. What I was
wondering was, is this the expected behavior for a route that has been
summarized downstream? Does anyone have a link to the tricks to use when
adding routes with variable masks to a classful protocol, I searched cco,
and the archives but haven't been able to find it, maybe I'm missing
something..
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Dec 12 2003 - 12:29:19 GMT-3