From: John Matijevic (matijevi@bellsouth.net)
Date: Tue Dec 23 2003 - 12:08:28 GMT-3
Hello Team,
This question is for informational purposes only, I do not have any problem,
and the problem is already solved.
I have the following scenerio, I have ospf network and rip version 1 network.
I have /22 IA route from ospf that is redistributed into Rip. If I create a
tunnel or change the primary physical ip address to /22 i can see the route,
and it gets advertised like it should. However, if I change to secondary
address to /22, the route does not get advertised to the rip version 1 domain.
I looked up doyle and he seems to have solved a discontiguous network using
secondary addresses, but I could not find any information on what would
prevent rip from advertifsing the ospf /22 route. Based on my understanding
RIP version 1 is a classful network, so it will do a route lookup for the
major classful network that it has, then if that matches it will try to match
the mask length for that network, it does this by consulting the route table,
since the /22 network is directly connected, it has a path to it, and will
advertise the network like it should. But im not sure why a secondary address,
would prevent rip from seeing that it has a /22 network as directly
connected???? And not advertise???? Any documentation of the matter would be
greatly appreciated, also please dont send partner link, because I dont have
login account.
Sincerely,
Matijevic
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jan 03 2004 - 08:25:44 GMT-3