From: kuldip singh (dipa.singh@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Feb 23 2005 - 11:11:03 GMT-3
Sundar,
Tunnel works fine when I run RIP between R5 and R6 and all the routes
in OSPF area 0 can be seen in R5. The tunnel only fails when I run OSPF
on the inter-link between R5 and R6. I put the interlink in between R5 and R6
in Area 3.
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 08:52:35 -0500, Sundar Palaniappan
<sundarp@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kuldip,
>
> Does your tunnel come up and stay up. I am thinking if you are running
> into a recursive routing lookup situation because the routing protocol
> outside the tunnel you are using is RIP which has less attractive
> admin distance than OSPF.
>
> My impression was you don't need to make 'area0' contiguous unless the
> lab asks you to do so i.e it is ok to have a partioned 'area0'. Though
> it's not a recommended design practice but it should work ok. Shall
> like to hear opinions from other members regarding this.
>
> --Sundar Palaniappan
>
>
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:45:10 +0800, Dillon Yang <gzdillon@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Your configuration : ip unnumbered loopback 0
> > It may be a problem. The type interface is not fit in with this case, based on the document.
> >
> > HTH
> >
> > dillon
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "kuldip singh" <dipa.singh@gmail.com>
> > To: "Dillon Yang" <gzdillon@hotmail.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 9:35 PM
> > Subject: Re: Discontiguous OSPF Area 0
> >
> > > Dillon,
> > >
> > > Extract from the document:
> > >
> > > You can also build a generic routing encapsulation (GRE) tunnel
> > > between Router 1.1.1.1 and Router 3.3.3.3 and put the tunnel in area 0
> > >
> > > How do you put the tunnel in area 0 ? Do they mean configure address
> > > 1.1.1.1 and 3.3.3.3 in area 0 ?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 20:08:01 +0800, Dillon Yang <gzdillon@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Go to http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/104/ospfdb7.html
> > > >
> > > > or
> > > >
> > > > search in http://www.groupstudy.com/cgi-bin/search
> > > >
> > > > HTH
> > > >
> > > > dillon
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "kuldip singh" <dipa.singh@gmail.com>
> > > > To: "Cisco certification" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 7:32 PM
> > > > Subject: Discontiguous OSPF Area 0
> > > >
> > > > > -------------------------R5-------------------------------R6-----------------------------------R7----------------
> > > > > OSPF Area 0 OSPF Area 3 OSPF Area 0
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Loopback on R5: 200.0.0.5
> > > > > Loopback on R6: 200.0.0.6
> > > > > Loopback on R7: 200.0.0.7
> > > > >
> > > > > Link between R5 and R6:
> > > > > 150.50.7.5 & 150.50.7.6
> > > > >
> > > > > Area 0 discontiguous but not allowed to use virtual link.
> > > > >
> > > > > R5 Loopback in Area 0
> > > > > R6 Loopback in Area 0
> > > > >
> > > > > Configured Tunnel between R5 and R6:
> > > > >
> > > > > int tunn 0
> > > > > ip unnumbered loopback 0
> > > > > tunn source 150.50.7.5
> > > > > tunn des 150.50.7.6
> > > > >
> > > > > int tunn 0
> > > > > ip unnumbered loopback 0
> > > > > tunn source 150.50.7.6
> > > > > tunn dest 150.50.7.5
> > > > >
> > > > > The OSPF Neighbor failed to build between R5 and R6 over the tunnel.
> > > > > Then I configured the virtual link between R5 and R6, OSPF neigbor
> > > > > relationship built
> > > > > over the tunnel.
> > > > >
> > > > > If I run RIP between R5 and R6 then OSPF works fine over the tunnel
> > > > > and the OSPF area 0 is connected.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do we have to run another protocol between the discontiguous OSPF Area 0 ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________________________________
> > > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Mar 03 2005 - 08:51:24 GMT-3