From: Richard Dumoulin (richard.dumoulin@vanco.es)
Date: Mon Jul 19 2004 - 13:31:38 GMT-3
If I remember well when you do a redistribute connected on RIP with a
route-map, and redistribute rip into ospf, then the directly connected
networks won't go from RIP to OSPF. Need testing though because I vaguely
remember,
--Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: john matijevic [mailto:matijevi@bellsouth.net]
Sent: lunes, 19 de julio de 2004 18:17
To: 'Kenneth Wygand'; 'James'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Redistribution question
Hello Kenneth,
Yes you are correct as far as redistributing the rip route, I just tested
this myself. I was thinking of another issue with RIP.
Sincerely,
John Matijevic, CCIE #13254, MCSE, CNE, CCEA
Network Consultant
Hablo Espanol
305-321-6232
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Kenneth Wygand
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 11:51 AM
To: john matijevic; James; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Redistribution question
John,
Great post. However, you mentioned:
<SNIP>
Basically, with RIP, and ISIS when you redistribute the protocols into
another protocol you will have to do a redistribute connected even through
you maybe advertising the networks in the routing protocol. </SNIP>
I agree that this is the case with ISIS because the connected interfaces are
not in the ISIS database, rather the CLNS database (they don't enter the
ISIS database until advertised to the ISIS process of a neighbor).
However, with RIP, this is not the case. If you have a loopback 1.1.1.1 on
R1, you enter this router into RIP with "network 1.0.0.0" and then
redistribute into OSPF which is running between R1 and R2, this _will_ in
fact show up in R2 as an E2 OSPF route.
Did you mean something else?
Kenneth E. Wygand
Systems Engineer, Project Services
CISSP #37102, CCNP, CCDP, ACSP, Cisco IPT Design Specialist, MCP, CNA,
Network+, A+
Custom Computer Specialists, Inc.
"The only unattainable goal is the one not attempted." -Anonymous
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of john
matijevic
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 11:02 AM
To: 'James'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Redistribution question
Hi James,
There are a few more tools that you can use to tell what routes are being
advertised by what protocol. When you do a sh ip route, you see that there
are external routes which are coming in, even though you don't have
redistribute connected under the routing protocol process. Basically, if you
put a network under the routing process in ospf or eigrp, that network is
going to be advertised to the neighbors, even though it is a "connected
route". If you look at the ospf databse by using a sh ip ospf database
command you should see that these routes are indeed in the database and
being advertised via lsa. With eigrp you can use the command sh ip eigrp
topology, to look at the eigrp database. When you redistribute, from one
protocol to another; lets say for example from ospf to eigrp; if you do a sh
ip route, all the routes marked O from output, and any connected route which
you included in the routing process, which are ospf routes on the router
your doing the redistribution should be redistributed into eigrp, and you
should be able to go to remote router and see the routes as external if you
do a sh ip route on the remote router. The part that may confuse you with
connected is when you are using a routing protocol like rip and isis for
redistribution. These protocols don't behave like the others do. And this is
where I see much confusion from many posts here on groupstudy time and time
again, this issue has been documented in previous posts. Basically, with
RIP, and ISIS when you redistribute the protocols into another protocol you
will have to do a redistribute connected even through you maybe advertising
the networks in the routing protocol. I hope this helps clear up some
confusion, you can also can lab this out to see the results for yourself.
Sincerely,
John Matijevic, CCIE #13254, MCSE, CNE, CCEA
Network Consultant
Hablo Espanol
305-321-6232
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
James
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 10:28 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Redistribution question
Hi group,
Got a question about redist'ing between protocols.
It is my understanding that when redistributing between two protocols
directly, it does not perform the exchange through the specific protocol
databases, but rather performed by going through the RIB, which you can see
by issuing
'sh ip route' command.
So.. let's take an example
R1--R2--<OSPF>-----------R5--------------<EIGRP>--R7--R8
s0/1 fa0/0
192.168.10.1/24 192.168.100.1/24
<-- OSPF Sector EIGRP Sector -->
R5 is redistributing between OSPF network (192.168.10.0/24) and EIGRP
network (192.168.100.1/24).
However, when doing 'sh ip route', the 192.168.10.0/24 and 192.168.100.0/24
are really NOT ospf, NOR eigrp networks, even though R8 sees
192.168.100.0/24 as EIGRP route, and R1 sees 192.168.10.0/24 as ospf route.
However, to R5, these networks are neither ospf, nor eigrp, but they are
Connected routes.
So redist connected is probably the needed solution on R5 to ensure that
connected networks are carried out as well.. However, I did this on R5 and
192.168.100.0/24 is appearing as OSPF E2 external route on R1/R2, as well as
192.168.10.0/24 appearing as EIGRP EX route on R7/R8 even though I do not
have 'redistribute connected' on R5. R5 just has redistribute ospf under
eigrp process, and redistribute eigrp under ospf process.
Am I missing something?
Thanks for clues!
-J
-- James Jun TowardEX Technologies, Inc. Technical Lead Network Design, Consulting, IT Outsourcing james@towardex.com Boston-based Colocation & Bandwidth Services cell: 1(978)-394-2867 web: http://www.towardex.com , noc: www.twdx.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Aug 01 2004 - 10:11:58 GMT-3