From: mohamed_n@sifycorp.com
Date: Tue Sep 28 2004 - 01:52:47 GMT-3
Hi
Your description shows you run ospf only between R4 and R1..You have RIP between all other routers.
So i couldnot understand why you redistribute in R2 ? Can you pls give more explanation.
Thanks
Mohamed.
> There was a bug that caused the Tag to be ignored on
> RIP routes when redistributing. I just tried to find
> it on CCO but no luck.
>
> --- gladston@br.ibm.com wrote:
>
> > Hope this is a bug (otherwise I must getting crazy).
> >
> > R2 redistribute a route it should not. Version is
> > 12.2(1d).
> >
> > R2 is connected to R3 (RIP). R3 is connected to R4
> > (RIP). R4 is connected to
> > R1 (OSPF). R4 redistributes routes from OSPF into
> > RIP using tag 4110.
> >
> > 172.16.3.0 is R3 loopback
> > 172.16.1.0 is R1 loopback
> >
> > In its routing table, R2 has 172.16.1.0 with tag
> > 4110 and 172.16.3.0 without
> > tag.
> >
> > r2#sir 172.16.1.0
> > Routing entry for 172.16.1.0/24
> > Known via "rip", distance 120, metric 3
> > Tag 4110
> > Redistributing via ospf 1, rip
> > Advertised by ospf 1 subnets route-map Tag2120
> > Last update from 172.16.23.3 on Serial0, 00:00:21
> > ago
> > Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> > * 172.16.23.3, from 172.16.23.3, 00:00:21 ago, via
> > Serial0
> > Route metric is 3, traffic share count is 1
> >
> >
> > r2#sir 172.16.3.0
> > Routing entry for 172.16.3.0/24
> > Known via "rip", distance 120, metric 1
> > Redistributing via ospf 1, rip
> > Advertised by ospf 1 subnets route-map Tag2120
> > Last update from 172.16.23.3 on Serial0, 00:00:07
> > ago
> > Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> > * 172.16.23.3, from 172.16.23.3, 00:00:07 ago, via
> > Serial0
> > Route metric is 1, traffic share count is 1
> >
> > R2 is configured to redistribute just routes with
> > tag 4110 (172.16.1.0) but
> > it also redistributes route without tag (172.16.3.0)
> >
> > router ospf 1
> > log-adjacency-changes
> > redistribute rip subnets route-map Tag2120
> > network 172.16.24.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> > network 172.16.25.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> > network 172.17.25.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> > !
> > route-map Tag2120 permit 5
> > match tag 4110
> >
> >
> > I tried it another way, explicit denying routes with
> > Tag4110, but it still transmit the route:
> >
> > R2# show run | be route-map Tag
> > route-map Tag permit 5
> > match tag 4000
> > !
> > route-map Tag deny 10
> > match tag 4110
> >
> > r5#sir 172.16.1.0
> > Routing entry for 172.16.1.0/24
> > Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 20
> > Tag 4110, type extern 2, forward metric 64
> > Last update from 172.17.25.2 on Serial0, 04:23:38
> > ago
> > Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> > * 172.17.25.2, from 172.16.2.2, 04:23:38 ago, via
> > Serial0
> > Route metric is 20, traffic share count is 1
> >
> > r5#
> > r5#sir 172.16.3.0
> > Routing entry for 172.16.3.0/24
> > Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 20, type
> > extern 2, forward metric 64
> > Last update from 172.17.25.2 on Serial0, 04:23:42
> > ago
> > Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> > * 172.17.25.2, from 172.16.2.2, 04:23:42 ago, via
> > Serial0
> > Route metric is 20, traffic share count is 1
> >
> > If I invert the order (deny 4110 first) then the
> > route without tag is also denied. It seems R2 does
> > not differentiate a route with tag and a route
> > without tag.
> >
> > r2#c
> > Enter configuration commands, one per line. End
> > with CNTL/Z.
> > r2(config)#route-map Tag deny 1
> > r2(config-route-map)#match tag 4110
> >
> > r5#sir 172.16.1.0
> > % Subnet not in table
> > r5#
> > r5#sir 172.16.1.0
> > % Subnet not in table
> > r5#
> >
> > Any comments?
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
> http://vote.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Oct 01 2004 - 15:00:50 GMT-3