From: Ali.Huang (zero5291@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Sep 13 2005 - 04:02:36 GMT-3
Thanks,Jens,Repeat again,
R1(s0.1)---ospf(1.1.12.0/29)-----(s0)R2(e0)---eigrp(1.1.14.0/24
<javascript:dl('http://1.1.12.0/29-----s0R2e0---eigrp1.1.14.0/24',1);>)
and R2 loopback0 1.1.2.2 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.2.2/',1);>
First,no redistribute connected configured,
R2:
router ospf 10
router-id 2.2.2.2 <javascript:dl('http://2.2.2.2/',1);>
redistribute eigrp 1 metric-type 1 subnets route-map filtertag
network 1.1.12.2 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.12.2/',1);>
0.0.0.0<javascript:dl('http://0.0.0.0/',1);>area 0
default-metric 150
route-map CON permit 10
match interface Loopback0
R1 routing table,the cost of subnet(
1.1.14.0/24<javascript:dl('http://1.1.14.0/24',1);>)
was equal to 150 plus 100000000/1544. From this,it seems like redistribution
by EIGRP,not connected directly.
O E1 1.1.14.0/24 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.14.0/24',1);> [110/214] via
1.1.12.2 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.12.2/',1);>, 00:00:01, Serial0.1
and issues redistribute connected route-map CON.
R2:
router ospf 10
router-id 2.2.2.2 <javascript:dl('http://2.2.2.2/',1);>
redistribute connected metric-type 1 subnets route-map CON
redistribute eigrp 1 metric-type 1 subnets route-map filtertag
network 1.1.12.2 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.12.2/',1);>
0.0.0.0<javascript:dl('http://0.0.0.0/',1);>area 0
default-metric 150
route-map CON permit 10
match interface Loopback0
And the 1.1.14.0/29 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.14.0/29',1);>disappeared in
R1 routing table and filter.
O E1 1.1.2.0/24 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.2.0/24',1);> [110/84] via
1.1.12.2 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.12.2/',1);>, 00:00:02, Serial0.1
next I add R2 e0 to route-map,
route-map CON permit 10
match interface Loopback0
route-map CON permit 20
match interface Ethernet0
router ospf 10
router-id 2.2.2.2 <javascript:dl('http://2.2.2.2/',1);>
redistribute connected metric-type 1 subnets route-map CON
redistribute eigrp 1 metric-type 1 subnets route-map filtertag
network 1.1.12.2 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.12.2/',1);>
0.0.0.0<javascript:dl('http://0.0.0.0/',1);>area 0
default-metric 150
Here is the R1 routing table.The cost is 84.
O E1 1.1.2.0/24 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.2.0/24',1);> [110/84] via
1.1.12.2 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.12.2/',1);>, 00:04:53, Serial0.1
O E1 1.1.14.0/24 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.14.0/24',1);> [110/84] via
1.1.12.2 <javascript:dl('http://1.1.12.2/',1);>, 00:00:19, Serial0.1
It works,but the cost are different before do redistribute connected.
The default-metric didn't force its cost to connected network,only working
for routing protocol.
Maybe the directly connection has high preference,becasue I do another
scenario,they has equal AD,the lower cost wasn't in routing table when I
change the cost by redistribute xxx metirc cost to control routing.
On 9/13/05, Schulz, Dave <DSchulz@dpsciences.com> wrote:
>
> I labbed up what Jens provided originally when I got home from work
> today (cause I didn't believe it either). And.... it works just like he
> says. Someone else mentioned that it happens to due to the RIB election
> by having the best path. This makes since now, since a connected route
> has a higher preference than a learned route.
>
> I then added the interfaces in the route-map (as described) and each one
> was redistributed as they were added. Very interesting! I did not know
> this. The question now is....does this happen with other types of
> redistribution (other than just from eigrp to ospf). This could be
> something to watch out for in the real lab.
>
> Thanks for the interesting lab scenario!
>
>
> Dave Schulz
> Email: dschulz@dpsciences.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Godswill Oletu
> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 11:12 PM
> To: Jens Petter Eikeland; zero5291@gmail.com
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com; kumara.shunmugam@wipro.com
> Subject: Re: redistribution between eigrp and ospf
>
> Jens,
>
> I do not know how clearer, I could be,
> however..............................
>
> I never knew this was a task with some restrictions and the original
> post
> did not indicate that, as a result it was easy to deduce that he was
> just
> trying to resolve a reachability problem in his network. I was also
> trying
> to make it clear that the 'redistribute eigrp 1' statement was still in
> effect and working as implemented.
>
> That said, depending on the restrictions in place, this can be resolved
> by
> various means, eg:
>
> 1. network e0 under ospf process
> 2. summary address
> 3.
> #route-map con permit 10
> #match interface loopback0
> #match interface ethernet0
>
> 4.
> #route-map con permit 10
> #match interface loopback0
> #
> !
> #route-map con permit 20
> !
>
>
> These are the four I can think of by heart at this time, there could be
> other ways of making it to work depending on the restrictions in place.
>
> I have not had the time to lab these yet, but any of the above options
> should work.
>
> HTH
> Godwill Oletu
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jens Petter Eikeland" <jenseike@start.no>
> To: "'Godswill Oletu'" <oletu@inbox.lv>; <zero5291@gmail.com>
> Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>; <kumara.shunmugam@wipro.com>
> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 10:26 PM
> Subject: SV: redistribution between eigrp and ospf
>
>
> No problem... I am cool. What you are telling below did not make much
> sense
> to me. I really do not understand what you are trying to say here. Try
> be a
> little more structured and not jump back and forth
>
> Jens Petter Eikeland
>
> -----Opprinnelig melding-----
> Fra: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] Pe vegne av
> Godswill Oletu
> Sendt: 13. september 2005 00:25
> Til: Jens Petter Eikeland; zero5291@gmail.com
> Kopi: ccielab@groupstudy.com; kumara.shunmugam@wipro.com
> Emne: Re: redistribution between eigrp and ospf
>
> take it easy.....life is not that hard.....
>
> try read my last post again at a latter time, when u would have cool
> off.
> the original post did not include "without network command", it sounded
> more
>
> like someone wanting to know 'why' and a way to bypass the problem. I
> was
> just trying to help, so take a deep breath and relax, we are all here to
> learn and not to throw punches....
>
> read this again from my last post:
>
> > 'e0' was just a connected route (represented by 'C' in the routing
> table)
> > and not an 'eigrp 1' route on R2, hence it was filtered out by the
> > 'redistribute connected .....route-map...' statement.
> >
>
> Let me know if you agree or disagree with that and why?
>
> If the above statement is correct, then any route in the 'eigrp 1'
> routing
> table will be redistributed regardless of the route-map permitting the
> connected interface 'lo0'. If one can get that particular route or some
> fashion of it into the routing table with the "C", then 'eigrp 1' will
> redistribute it regardless of what is in the 'redistribute
> connected.....'
> statement
>
> We seems to be out of luck, because the route '192.168.1.0<http://192.168.1.0>'
> is a
> connected
> route "C" on R2, with an admin distance of 0 (It will be the best route
> no
> matter what is done). The best distance one can achieve via
> redistibution or
>
> by using the distance command is the value of "1". This knowledge is
> fundanmental in understanding what really took place and how to fix it.
>
> Another method is:
> to summarize the network, ie ip address of 'e0' to a different boundary:
>
> eg
>
> #interface loopback0
> #ip address 10.1.1.1 <http://10.1.1.1> 255.0.0.0 <http://255.0.0.0>
> !
> #interface ethernet0
> #ip address 192.168.1.1 <http://192.168.1.1> 255.255.255.0<http://255.255.255.0>
> #ip summary-address eigrp 1 192.168.0.0 <http://192.168.0.0> 255.255.0.0<http://255.255.0.0>
> !
> #router eigrp 1
> #network 192.168.1.0 <http://192.168.1.0>
> #
> !
> #interface serial0
> #ip address 172.16.1.1 <http://172.16.1.1> 255.255.0.0<http://255.255.0.0>
> !
> #router ospf 1
> #redistribute eigrp 1
> #redistribute connected subnets route-map filter-connected
> #network 172.16.0.0 <http://172.16.0.0> 0.0.255.255 <http://0.0.255.255>area 0
> !
> #route-map filter-connected permit 10
> #match interface loopback0
> #
>
> With this I was still able to achieve reachabilty without advertising
> 'e0'
> network into ospf. I rely on 'redistribute eigrp 1' to pass the route
> accross to R1.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jens Petter Eikeland" <jenseike@start.no>
> To: "'Godswill Oletu'" <oletu@inbox.lv>; <zero5291@gmail.com>
> Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>; <kumara.shunmugam@wipro.com>
> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 4:15 PM
> Subject: SV: redistribution between eigrp and ospf
>
>
> > The task was to redistribute the loopback of router 2 without using
> > network
> > command. Then you need to use a red connected with a route map of
> lopback.
> > When you do this the route disapers (eigrp's e0)... why don't you test
> it
> > in
> > a live rack. As you also can see from the ordernary question about
> this
> > that
> > this is exactly what is happening... I don't think you can come here
> and
> > say
> > that somebody are wrong if you don't test it and prove yourselfe. This
> is
> > a
> > vel documented and I first learned it at a bootcamp with brian and
> brian
> > at
> > internetworkexpert.
> >
> > Jens Petter Eikeland
> >
> > -----Opprinnelig melding-----
> > Fra: Godswill Oletu [mailto:oletu@inbox.lv]
> > Sendt: 12. september 2005 22:07
> > Til: Jens Petter Eikeland; zero5291@gmail.com
> > Kopi: ccielab@groupstudy.com; kumara.shunmugam@wipro.com
> > Emne: Re: redistribution between eigrp and ospf
> >
> > Did you try...
> >
> > #router ospf 1
> > #network <e0 network> <wildcard mask> area <ur appropriate area #>
> >
> > I understood what you were saying, but my point is, if a network is
> > present
> > in 'eigrp 1' table, 'redistribute eigrp 1' will redistribute it
> regardless
> > of the route-map connected filter.
> >
> > 'e0' was just a connected route (represented by 'C' in the routing
> table)
> > and not an 'eigrp 1' route on R2, hence it was filtered out by the
> > 'redistribute connected .....route-map...' statement.
> >
> > HTH
> > Godswill Oletu
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jens Petter Eikeland" <jenseike@start.no>
> > To: "'Godswill Oletu'" <oletu@inbox.lv>; <zero5291@gmail.com>
> > Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>; <kumara.shunmugam@wipro.com>
> > Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 1:02 PM
> > Subject: SV: redistribution between eigrp and ospf
> >
> >
> >>I will try explain this again, because I know that I am right after I
> have
> >> tested this out. Me too thought this sounded far out when I first
> learn
> >> about it, and needed to see it with my own eyes before I belived it,
> but
> >> after tested this in the rack many times I know this is how it works,
> so
> >> please test it your selfe man...
> >>
> >> First of, e0 of r2 is in this scenario is not redistributed in to
> eigrp,
> >> but
> >> is put in to eigrp with the network command. The hidden command that
> the
> >> router do when you enter any network in to the routin prosess with
> the
> >> network command is doing a hidden redistributed connected withs
> include
> >> all
> >> the local networks that you entered in with the network command. This
> is
> >> how
> >> it works :
> >>
> >> Router eigrp 1
> >> Network (e0)
> >>
> >> When you enter this command the router put this networks in to the
> >> routing
> >> process by entering :
> >>
> >> Router eigrp 1
> >> Redistribute connected route-map connected-local routes
> >> Route-map connected-local-routes
> >>
> >> The router will never show this command in the config, but this is
> what
> >> the
> >> router actually do.
> >>
> >> So
> >>
> >> When you then do a redistribute connected in to the other routing
> process
> >> (ospf here) with the command :
> >>
> >> Interface loopbac 0
> >> Ip address xx.xx.xx.xx
> >>
> >> Router ospf 1
> >> Redistribute eigrp 1 subnets
> >> Redistribute connected subnets route-map loopback
> >> Route-map connected permit 10
> >> Match interface lo0
> >>
> >> When you do this, you will breake the redistribute connected that the
> >> router
> >> did for entering e0 in to the routing table(routing process of r2).
> The
> >> way
> >> to fix this is to include this router in to this redistributing
> process
> >> like
> >> this :
> >>
> >> Route-map loopbac
> >> Match interface lo0 e0 (eigrp's e0 network)
> >>
> >>
> >> I suggest you lab this up before you say that I am wrong, because
> this is
> >> how the routing process works in a cisco router when you do this kind
> of
> >> redistributing on the router. This goes only for when you do this.
> >>
> >> Jens P
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Opprinnelig melding-----
> >> Fra: Godswill Oletu [mailto:oletu@inbox.lv]
> >> Sendt: 12. september 2005 18:42
> >> Til: Jens Petter Eikeland; zero5291@gmail.com
> >> Kopi: ccielab@groupstudy.com; kumara.shunmugam@wipro.com
> >> Emne: Re: redistribution between eigrp and ospf
> >>
> >> Ali,
> >>
> >> If you can, post configs from R1 & R2.
> >>
> >> Just redistributing connected with a route-map will not make 'e0' or
> >> other
> >> routes redistributed from eigrp to disappear from your routing table
> or
> >> the
> >> routing table of R1. R2 will treat each statement one after the other
> and
> >> in
> >>
> >> a top to bottom fashion (redistribution will be treated first and
> your
> >> network statements will be rearranged and treated one after the other
> >> after
> >> the redistribute command).
> >>
> >> If the network of e0 is not been advertised by ospf separately (ie
> you
> >> are
> >> not using 'network <e0 network> area <#>' under your ospf process or
> any
> >> command that will advertise it> and it is only been advertised under
> your
> >> eigrp process and u are relying on the 'redistribute' command to send
> it
> >> to
> >> ospf, make sure you have 'redistribute eigrp <as#>.....' under your
> ospf
> >> process with the 'redistribute connected...' . Redistribute eigrp
> <as#>
> >> will
> >>
> >> take care of all routes from eigrp including your 'e0' and the
> >> 'redistribute
> >>
> >> connected route-map' will filter your connected networks by the
> route-map
> >> and only advertise the ones that passed the test.
> >>
> >> Posting your configs will sort things out and put you in the right
> >> track.....
> >>
> >> HTH
> >> Godswill Oletu
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Jens Petter Eikeland" <jenseike@start.no>
> >> To: <zero5291@gmail.com>
> >> Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>; <kumara.shunmugam@wipro.com>
> >> Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 11:50 AM
> >> Subject: SV: redistribution between eigrp and ospf
> >>
> >>
> >>> Hi
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> What do you mean. This is how the router is behaving. Please lab it
> up
> >>> yourselfe. I have done it several times, and
> >>> this happens every time
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Jens Petter Eikeland
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _____
> >>>
> >>> Fra: Ali.Huang [mailto:zero5291@gmail.com]
> >>> Sendt: 12. september 2005 17:48
> >>> Til: Jens Petter Eikeland
> >>> Kopi: ccielab@groupstudy.com; kumara.shunmugam@wipro.com
> >>> Emne: Re: redistribution between eigrp and ospf
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks your replies.
> >>>
> >>> I wonder if it is a default behavior,I doubt.
> >>>
> >>> If not redistribute connected ,I checked the routing table,and found
> the
> >>> metric of e0 doesn't like a connected network at all.
> >>>
> >>> So I feel doubt.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 9/12/05, Jens Petter Eikeland <jenseike@start.no> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Ok, I have done some reachearc and found what is happening to the
> >>> router -
> >>>
> >>> When you do redistribution here between eigrp and ospf (or any
> other
> >>> routing protocol.
> >>>
> >>> Router eigrp 1
> >>> Network ( e0 )
> >>> Redistribute ospf 1
> >>>
> >>> (the router will by default run this command)
> >>> Redistribute connected subnets route-map conn
> >>>
> >>> Route-map default permit 10
> >>> Match interface e0
> >>>
> >>> (This is what the router do when you add a network command
> >>> to the routing process to add the nets in to the routing table
> >>> automaticly)
> >>>
> >>> When you do a redistributed conected on the same router with a
> match
> >>> int
> >>> Lo0
> >>>
> >>> Router ospf 1
> >>> Redistribute connected subnet route-map conn
> >>>
> >>> Route-map conn
> >>> Match int lo0
> >>>
> >>> When you do this you will loose the Ethernet interface that you
> >>> advertised
> >>> in to eigrp
> >>> from the routing table and you will breake the redistribution
> process
> >>> that
> >>> eigrp did on its connected interfaces. This is a default behaviour
> of
> >>> cisco
> >>> routers.
> >>>
> >>> You can solve this by doing in ospf :
> >>>
> >>> Redistributed connected permit 10 route-map conn
> >>>
> >>> Route-map conn
> >>> Match interface e0
> >>>
> >>> In addition to the connected loopback you redistributed in earlier
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hope this explain this for you. This is a behaivur that the router
> has,
> >>> and
> >>> this is something you need to think of when you do redistribution on
> a
> >>> border router
> >>>
> >>> Jens P
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -----Opprinnelig melding-----
> >>> Fra: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] Pe vegne
> av
> >>> Ali.Huang
> >>> Sendt: 12. september 2005 13:35
> >>> Til: Cisco certification
> >>> Emne: redistribution between eigrp and ospf
> >>>
> >>> hi,group,
> >>> Topo:R1---ospf-----(s0)R2(e0)---eigrp
> >>> I do bi-direction redistribution.work well.and the subnet of e0 was
> >>> diaplayed in R1 routing table.But when I want to redistribute
> loopback0
> >>> of
> >>> R2 into ospf domain,use the following clauses;
> >>> route-map CON permit 10
> >>> match interface Loopback0
> >>> router ospf 10
> >>> redistribute connected metric-type 1 metric 100 subnets route-map
> CON
> >>> The subnet of e0 disappeares from R1 routing table,and the loopback0
> of
> >>> R2
> >>> OK.If removes the redistribute connected,OK.it come back.who can
> tell me
> >>> why?
> >>>
> >>> THX.
> >>> Ali.huang
> >>>
> >>>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> >>> Subscription information may be found at:
> >>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> THX.
> >>> Ali.huang
> >>>
> >>>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> >>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
-- THX. Ali.huang
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Oct 02 2005 - 14:40:14 GMT-3