OSPF summary and multiple ABRs due VL

From: gladston@br.ibm.com
Date: Fri Mar 04 2005 - 17:15:08 GMT-3

Next message: gladston@br.ibm.com: "Re: CCIE R&S - certified at 1st attempt"
Previous message: marvin greenlee: "RE: Fragment control in access-lists. [bcc][faked-from]"
Next in thread: marvin greenlee: "RE: OSPF summary and multiple ABRs due VL"
Maybe reply: marvin greenlee: "RE: OSPF summary and multiple ABRs due VL"
Maybe reply: gladston@br.ibm.com: "RE: OSPF summary and multiple ABRs due VL"
Maybe reply: marvin greenlee: "RE: OSPF summary and multiple ABRs due VL"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

R7/R8/R4 are connected to area 22.
R8/R11 are connected to area 26
R4/R2/R3 are connected to area 0.
R4/R5 are connected to area 4.
R5/R10 are connected to area 20.

It is required virtual link between R8--R3 (because area 26) and R5--R4 (because area 20).

R8/R5/R4 area ABRs. (originally just R4, but now R7/R5 due virtual link)

Area 22 should be summarized to 172.16.0.0/17.

The router that should be configured with 'area 22 range 172.16.0.0 255.255.128.0' are R7 and R3. This because they are connected to area 11.

Is that correct?

Next message: gladston@br.ibm.com: "Re: CCIE R&S - certified at 1st attempt"
Previous message: marvin greenlee: "RE: Fragment control in access-lists. [bcc][faked-from]"
Next in thread: marvin greenlee: "RE: OSPF summary and multiple ABRs due VL"
Maybe reply: marvin greenlee: "RE: OSPF summary and multiple ABRs due VL"
Maybe reply: gladston@br.ibm.com: "RE: OSPF summary and multiple ABRs due VL"
Maybe reply: marvin greenlee: "RE: OSPF summary and multiple ABRs due VL"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 03 2005 - 17:56:40 GMT-3