From: Shibu Nair (shinair@cisco.com)
Date: Mon Jul 19 2004 - 13:43:45 GMT-3
You are right.
Indirect redistribution is not allowed on the same router.
for instance if you are redistributing loopback 1 on R1 in to RIP.
Now loopback 1 ip address is part of RIP.
Assuming that you are redistributing RIP in to OSPF on the same
router. You would think that the loopback ip address which is now
part of RIP will redistribute to OSPF. But it will NOT happen since
you are doing both redistribution on the same router and this kind
of indirect redistribution on the same router will not be allowed.
Shibu
At 05:31 PM 7/19/2004 +0100, Richard Dumoulin wrote:
>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
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>**********************************************************************
>Any opinions expressed in the email are those of the individual and not
>necessarily the company. This email and any files transmitted with it are
>confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are
>not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering it to
>the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in
>error and that any dissemination, distribution, copying or use is strictly
>prohibited.
>
>If you have received this email in error, or if you are concerned with the
>content of this email please e-mail to: e-security.support@vanco.info
>
>The contents of an attachment to this e-mail may contain software viruses
>which could damage your own computer system. While the sender has taken
>every reasonable precaution to minimise this risk, we cannot accept
>liability for any damage which you sustain as a result of software
>viruses. You should carry out your own virus checks before opening any
>attachments to this e-mail.
>**********************************************************************
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
>http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Aug 01 2004 - 10:11:58 GMT-3