From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Thu Jul 08 2004 - 21:01:24 GMT-3
There ya go! Another solution outside that box... Nice to know there are
multiple viable solutions for things. :)
Ty, heed well... Think through them all! And as long as the end result
works within the parameters that your lab scenario gives you, then you're
good to go!
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, CISSP,
JNCIP, et al.
IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
http://www.ipexpert.net
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Brian Dennis
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 5:59 PM
To: Ty; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: recursive routing
Ty,
You could also use a prefix-list if an access-list isn't permitted
to apply to a distribute-list ;-)
Brian Dennis, CCIE #2210 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security)
bdennis@internetworkexpert.com Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987
Direct: 775-745-6404 (Outside the US and Canada)
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Ty
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 2:40 PM
To: Scott Morris; Brian McGahan; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: recursive routing
yes, distance did it...I just put it on the wrong router...DOH!!!!
Thanks y'all :-)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Morris" <swm@emanon.com>
To: "'Brian McGahan'" <bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com>;
<tycampbell@comcast.net>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 2:21 PM
Subject: RE: recursive routing
> That would be very true, except for the fact that I'm aware of the lab
that
> he's working on, and ACLs aren't allowed.
>
> So, the problem is intended to appear to highlight the problem, and
the
> intended solution would be to work around it.
>
> Sooo... Yup, very good point that once you recognize it, you should
make
it
> go away ahead of time. But every once and a while you aren't allowed
to
do
> the "normal" things to make that so simple.
>
>
> Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
CISSP,
> JNCIP, et al.
> IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
> IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
> swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
> http://www.ipexpert.net
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian McGahan [mailto:bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 2:33 PM
> To: Scott Morris; tycampbell@comcast.net; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: recursive routing
>
> Scott,
>
> If you want to recognize the problem, then alleviate it, why would
> you even advertise the tunnel destination into the protocol running
over
the
> tunnel? :) There is never a valid case where the tunnel destination
can
be
> routed via the tunnel, so why go out of the way to fix a problem that
> shouldn't exist in the first place?
>
>
> Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593
> bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
>
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
> http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
> Toll Free: 877-224-8987 x 705
> Outside US: 775-826-4344 x 705
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of
> > Scott Morris
> > Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 1:15 PM
> > To: tycampbell@comcast.net; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: recursive routing
> >
> > Think distance man! :)
> >
> > The problem with recursive routing (on a tunnel interface) is when
the
> > router decides it wants to get to the other side of the tunnel
> > (tunnel-destination ip) through the tunnel itself. It brings about
> one of
> > those philosophical quandaries in life.
> >
> > So think like the router does. Routing is just fine before the
tunnel
> > comes up, learning through RIP, right? After the tunnel comes up,
the
> router
> > learns the same route through OSPF. OSPF is preferred. Why? AD.
> >
> > So... Recognize the problem, then alleviate it! Make the router do
> what
> > you want. :)
> >
> > Change the distance for that route (either in OSPF or in RIP,
> depending on
> > your lab requirements) and life will be better. The same decision
> factor
> > for that route should bring the same result both before and after
the
> > tunnel is created.
> >
> > HTH,
> >
> >
> > Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
> CISSP,
> > JNCIP, et al.
> > IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
> > IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
> > swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
> > http://www.ipexpert.net
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of
> > tycampbell@comcast.net
> > Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 1:56 PM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: recursive routing
> >
> > I have searched the doc cd...over and over..even searched on google.
> >
> > I am looking for a way to fix recursive routing through a tunnel
> without
> > using static routes..
> >
> >
> > anyone have any ideas ?
> >
> >
> > Thanks!!!
> >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Aug 01 2004 - 10:11:50 GMT-3