From: David Deng (glend_99@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Jan 27 2004 - 20:15:40 GMT-3
ED,
I have tweek the distance for the return path so there
will be no load balance on the return one, I think the
key is the path to the 191.10.1.1 path being load
balanced, I remeber Brian has a good rememdy on the ip
ospf cost, you need to change the neigh link cost
instead it's own cost, does not seems to be working
for me.
Thanks,
David
--- "Edwards, Andrew M" <andrew.m.edwards@boeing.com>
wrote:
> I thought about this a little more dave... The load
> balancing is like
> this...
>
> On one path there is no loop. On the next path
> there is a loop and no
> response.
>
> So try debug ICMP and watch which router processes a
> sucessful echo and
> which one does not... And, because your topology has
> areas for loops
> watch for asymetric routes and having one of the
> return paths being load
> balanced with a routing loop.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Deng [mailto:glend_99@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2004 4:16 PM
> To: Arvind Yadav; Edwards, Andrew M;
> ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: prevent loop on ospf link
>
>
> Arvind,
>
> So this is normal and don't need to worry about it,
> in
> case this become a challenge question then I
> wouldn't
> know how to solve it then...
>
>
> David
> --- Arvind Yadav <arvindyadav@comcast.net> wrote:
> > This is a load balancing issue.
> >
> > is 2 seconds:
> > !.!.!
> > Success rate is 60 percent (3/5), round-trip
> > min/avg/max = 60/61/64 ms
> > 3550-A#
> >
> >
> > ----- 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 1:09 PM
> > Subject: Re: prevent loop on ospf link
> >
> >
> > > 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
>
=== 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 - 09:07:51 GMT-3