From: George Cassels (glcassels3@nc.rr.com)
Date: Sun Jun 26 2005 - 21:45:11 GMT-3
Sila,
Take a look at my response to Tim...I used the summary-address
command and it aggregated the routes going to another ospf area 0
router.
George
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Sila Moni
Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 7:31 PM
To: ccie2be; Group Study
Subject: Re: using nssa and area X range together
You can't summarize external routes (I don't have a
rack to lab it out to confirm). Since R2 has only one
exit point, you can use LSA 3 filter to deny all
routes except for the default prefix. Example:
ip prefix-list LSA-FILTER deny x.x.x.x/24
ip prefix-list LSA-FILTER permit 0.0.0.0/0 le 32
!
router ospf 1
area 1 filter-list prefix LSA-FILTER in
--- ccie2be <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> This is an interesting scenario - at least I hadn't
> thought much about this
> previously.
>
> Let's say you have this topology:
>
> IGP R1 nssa R2 area 0 R3
>
>
> R1 is redist routes from another IGP into OSPF. Can
> I use the area X range
> command on R2 to summarize routes learned from the
> IGP redist into the nssa
> area so that the backbone doesn't have all those
> specific routes from the
> other routing protocol?
>
>
> And, more generally, do I need to be concerned about
> any restrictions on
> using the area X range command to summarize routes
> into the backbone area
> depending upon what type of stub area is configured?
>
> What I find interesting about this scenario is that
> typically when I think
> about what type of stub area to configure, I'm
> concerned about what routes
> are advertised into the stub area from the backbone.
>
> In this scenario, it's just the opposite. Here the
> concern is what routes
> area advertised from the stub area into the backbone
> area.
>
> (I don't have access to any routers at the moment to
> lab this up.
>
> TIA, Tim
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jul 06 2005 - 14:43:44 GMT-3