From: David Deng (glend_99@yahoo.com)
Date: Fri Jan 23 2004 - 15:09:24 GMT-3
I have change the route using distance on r2 now r2
have r5 as next hop to reach 136.10.56.0 net, but on
SWa, the result is still the same.
Why does it show in the following also as isis,rip
routes ? the interarea route from OSPF is correct.
r2-2611xm#sh ip route 136.10.56.0
Routing entry for 136.10.56.0/28
Known via "ospf 100", distance 66, metric 106, type
inter area
Redistributing via isis, rip
Advertised by isis metric 20 metric-type internal
level-1-2 rip metric 10
Last update from 136.10.100.5 on Serial0/0.256,
00:00:45 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 136.10.100.5, from 136.10.5.5, 00:00:45 ago, via
Serial0/0.256
Route metric is 106, traffic share count is 1
SW-A#ping
Protocol [ip]:
Target IP address: 191.10.1.1
Repeat count [5]:
Datagram size [100]:
Timeout in seconds [2]:
Extended commands [n]: y
Source address or interface: 136.10.10.1
Type of service [0]:
Set DF bit in IP header? [no]:
Validate reply data? [no]:
Data pattern [0xABCD]:
Loose, Strict, Record, Timestamp, Verbose[none]:
Sweep range of sizes [n]:
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 191.10.1.1, timeout
is 2 seconds:
!.!.!
Success rate is 60 percent (3/5), round-trip
min/avg/max = 60/61/64 ms
3550-A#
--- Arvind Yadav <arvindyadav@comcast.net> wrote:
> This is what I was taking about, to reach r5
> (136.10.56.5) R2 will send
> packet to R6.
>
> O IA 136.10.56.0/28 [110/96] via 136.10.100.6,
> 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
>
> Do one thing create a loopback on R5 and advertise
> that into OSPF and do the
> extended ping with souce loopback, it should work
> fine.
>
> Arivnd
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Deng" <glend_99@yahoo.com>
> To: "Arvind Yadav" <arvindyadav@comcast.net>;
> "Edwards, Andrew M"
> <andrew.m.edwards@boeing.com>;
> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 2:06 AM
> Subject: Re: prevent loop on ospf link
>
>
> > Arvind,
> >
> > Here it goes, I removed other routes that ar enot
> > related.
> >
> > r2-2611xm#sh ip route
> > 136.10.0.0/16 is variably subnetted, 21
> subnets,
> > 7 masks
> > C 136.10.2.0/24 is directly connected,
> Loopback0
> > O IA 136.10.6.6/32 [110/57] via 136.10.100.6,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > O IA 136.10.5.5/32 [110/57] via 136.10.100.5,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > R 136.10.1.0/24 [120/1] via 136.10.12.1,
> > 00:00:20, FastEthernet0/0
> > O E2 136.10.7.0/24 [110/100] via 136.10.100.6,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > i L2 136.10.4.0/24 [115/30] via 136.10.24.4,
> > Serial0/0.24
> > O IA 136.10.10.1/32 [110/97] via 136.10.100.6,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > O E2 136.10.8.0/24 [110/100] via 136.10.100.6,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > O E2 136.10.9.0/24 [110/115] via 136.10.100.6,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > C 136.10.12.0/24 is directly connected,
> > FastEthernet0/0
> > O IA 136.10.20.1/32 [110/97] via 136.10.100.6,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > C 136.10.24.0/29 is directly connected,
> > Serial0/0.24
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > O IA 136.10.56.0/28 [110/96] via 136.10.100.6,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > O E2 136.10.70.0/24 [110/100] via 136.10.100.6,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > O E2 136.10.69.0/24 [110/115] via 136.10.100.6,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > O E2 136.10.78.0/25 [110/100] via 136.10.100.6,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > O 136.10.100.6/32 [110/56] via 136.10.100.6,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > O 136.10.100.5/32 [110/56] via 136.10.100.5,
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > C 136.10.100.0/27 is directly connected,
> > Serial0/0.256
> > 50.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
> > B 50.50.50.0 [200/0] via 136.10.6.6, 1d00h
> > O E2 208.10.89.0/24 [110/100] via 136.10.100.6,
> 1d00h,
> > Serial0/0.256
> > 2.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
> > C 2.2.2.0 is directly connected, Loopback5
> > 100.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 8 subnets,
> 2
> > masks
> > 00:00:23, FastEthernet0/0
> > 1d00h, Serial0/0.256
> > 191.10.0.0/24 is subnetted, 5 subnets
> > B 191.10.5.0 [20/0] via 136.10.1.1, 1d00h
> > B 191.10.4.0 [20/0] via 136.10.1.1, 1d00h
> > B 191.10.1.0 [20/0] via 136.10.1.1, 1d00h
> > B 191.10.3.0 [20/0] via 136.10.1.1, 1d00h
> > B 191.10.2.0 [20/0] via 136.10.1.1, 1d00h
> > r2-2611xm#
> > --- Arvind Yadav <arvindyadav@comcast.net> wrote:
> > > Past the "sh ip ro" output of R2
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "David Deng" <glend_99@yahoo.com>
> > > To: "Arvind Yadav" <arvindyadav@comcast.net>;
> > > "Edwards, Andrew M"
> > > <andrew.m.edwards@boeing.com>;
> > > <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 1:45 AM
> > > Subject: Re: prevent loop on ospf link
> > >
> > >
> > > > Arvind,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the suggestion, I have tried to
> change
> > > the
> > > > cost on either r6 or r5 interface ospf cost
> and
> > > also
> > > > using the distance command to tweak the r5 AD
> on
> > > SWa,
> > > > clear ip os pro and still get the same result,
> > > looks
> > > > like the metric stick on 66 for both, I am
> > > desparate
> > > > to try anything and would apprecitae any help
> and
> > > > suggestions
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > David
> > > >
> > > > --- Arvind Yadav <arvindyadav@comcast.net>
> wrote:
> > > > > May be problem in return path to
> 136.10.56.5. R2
> > > > > must be getting two equal
> > > > > path for 136.10.56..x subnet and doing
> > > loadbalancing
> > > > > among both the link.
> > > > > Try to make R5 prefer path by changing the
> cost
> > > and
> > > > > then see.
> > > > >
> > > > > Arvind
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "David Deng" <glend_99@yahoo.com>
> > > > > To: "Edwards, Andrew M"
> > > > > <andrew.m.edwards@boeing.com>;
> > > > > <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > > Sent: Friday, January 23, 2004 1:05 AM
> > > > > Subject: RE: prevent loop on ospf link
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > I am able to ping the 191.10.1.1 from r2
> and
> > > r5
> > > > > > without missing any ping, I guess my FR
> cloud
> > > is
> > > > > ok,
> > > > > > but what type of problem that I might run
> into
> > > ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > ED
> > > > > > --- "Edwards, Andrew M"
> > > > > <andrew.m.edwards@boeing.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > David,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As far as I can see from what you have
> > > provided
> > > > > here
> > > > > > > there is not a
> > > > > > > loop. It looks like you have equal cost
> > > paths
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > OSPF from r5/r6 to the
> > > > > > > next hop in BGP to network 191.10.1.1.
> The
> > > > > trace
> > > > > > > you are seeing is
> > > > > > > correct for load-balancing in OSPF. I
> think
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > the timeouts are
> > > > > > > related to something else on the
> simulation
> > > > > network.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Are you having any other issues in the
> > > 'frame
> > > > > > > cloud'?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Andy
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: David Deng
> [mailto:glend_99@yahoo.com]
> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 10:51
> PM
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Feb 02 2004 - 09:07:49 GMT-3