From: Paresh Khatri (Paresh.Khatri@aapt.com.au)
Date: Thu Apr 21 2005 - 21:59:09 GMT-3
Hi George,
In your test setup, are other interfaces over which OSPF is running still advertised into EIGRP, or did you not have OSPF running over any other interfaces ?.
In the example you have cited, you are redistributing connected interfaces into OSPF - that does not mean that you are running OSPF over the interface and hence, it should not be injected into EIGRP. So that initial statement of mine still holds. Redistribution is not transitive i.e if you redistribute from protocol X into protocol Y and then redistribute protocol Y into protocol Z, routes from protocol X will NOT get redistributed into protocol Z - which is consistent with your performance.
Appreciate your response.
Paresh.
-----Original Message-----
From: George Cassels (gcassels) [mailto:gcassels@cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, 22 April 2005 10:45 AM
To: Paresh Khatri; Lanny Ballard; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: route redistribution question
Lanny I have also noticed that if you redistribute any interface as
redistribute connected the statement below from Paresh is not longer
true. So say I did the following because we will say loopback 0 was not
included in any routing protocol and the requirement is for full IP
connectivity.
Router OSPF 1
Redistribute connected route-map connected subnets
Route-map connected permit 5
Match interface loopback 0
After I do the above the connected interfaces over which the source
protocol is running will no longer be injected from OSPF to EIGRP. So in
your case the 10.5.5.0 network would also need to be added to the
redistribute connected. This seems to hold true no matter which
protocol the router is running that is doing the redistribute connected.
Try is out and see if the same happens to you.
George
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Paresh Khatri
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 8:46 PM
To: Lanny Ballard; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: route redistribution question
Hi Lanny,
When redistributing routes, routes for the connected interfaces over
which the "source" protocol is running are injected as well...
HTH,
Paresh.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Lanny Ballard
Sent: Thursday, 21 April 2005 10:34 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: route redistribution question
I am doing yet another route redistribution lab, and i have a question I
was under the assumption that in order to redistribut a route into a
routing protocol, that route had to be in the rout table; however, i
have done a lab recently where I was redistribution ospf into eigrp, and
eigrp advertised a route that was connected, and not an ospf route.
here is the example.
route 5 is mutually redistributing between ospf and eigrp.
Now if you notice I have added 10.5.5.5 to the ospf process. This
address is a loopback interface. But eigrp is also advertising it. Why
is this? I thought eigrp should only advertise this route if it was in
the route table as an ospf route, but it is in the route table as
connected.
C 10.5.5.0 is directly connected, Loopback0
router eigrp 100
redistribute ospf 1 metric 1544 100 255 1 1500 network 172.150.1.5
0.0.0.0 no auto-summary !
router ospf 1
router-id 10.5.5.5
log-adjacency-changes
area 0 authentication message-digest
area 1 nssa default-information-originate redistribute eigrp 100 metric
10 subnets network 10.5.5.5 0.0.0.0 area 0 network 172.150.5.5 0.0.0.0
area 0 network 172.150.8.5 0.0.0.0 area 1 neighbor 172.150.5.6 neighbor
172.150.5.2
TIA for any help!
Lanny
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue May 03 2005 - 07:55:06 GMT-3