From: Victor Cappuccio (cvictor@protokolgroup.com)
Date: Fri Oct 14 2005 - 21:25:44 GMT-3
Hello Ladon, nice question to think about. Could you please can you
clarify a little bit the problem
R3, R3 and R4 are running EIGRP AS-1 between them ??
- R1 and R2 are running EIGRP AS-2 between them
- R3, R3, and R4 are running EIGRP AS-1 between them
- R3, R4, and R5 are running OSPF AREA-0 over FR between them
- R2 is mutually redistributing EIGRP AS-1 & AS-2
- R3 and R4 are mutually redistributing OSPF and EIGRP
Do not get the topology yet
My first thought are tags (but could you please clarify the problem)
Thanks
Victor.
Landon Fitts wrote:
>I have a question on the various methods available to prevent EIGRP
>routes that are redistributed into OSPF at two different ASBRs from
>being installed into the route table of those same ABSRs when relearned
>from OSPF. I was able to use a "distribute-list <acl> in" under the ospf
>process to successfully achieve this, but I couldn't get it to work using
>a route-map on the redistribution statement matching on the tagged eigrp
>networks. Using the route-map with tagging method, the routing table
>would go back and forth between installing an E2 route and a EX route on
>the ASBRs every time I cleared the route table.
>
>To make this clearer below is my topology:
>
>
> |---R3-----|
>R1-----R2-----SW-----| |-----R5
> <mailto:lafitts@cisco.com> |---R4-----|
>
>
>Scenario:
>- R1 and R2 are running EIGRP AS-2 between them
>- R3, R3, and R4 are running EIGRP AS-1 between them
>- R3, R4, and R5 are running OSPF AREA-0 over FR between them
>- R2 is mutually redistributing EIGRP AS-1 & AS-2
>- R3 and R4 are mutually redistributing OSPF and EIGRP
>
>Problem:
>Networks from AS-2 will be seen as EIGRP external routes at R3 & R4, so
>when these networks are relearned back from R5 via OSPF the route table
>at R3 and R4 will install the E2 routes because of the lower admin
>distance. This will not be a problem for the networks learned from
>AS-1 via R2, because at R3 & R4 those networks will be seen as internal
>EIGRP routes.
>
>Route Redistribution at multiple redistribution points has never been an
>easy
>topic for me, but this scenario seems to add more complications. Can any
>of you routing experts shed some light on this for me?
>
>
>Thanks,
>Landon
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Nov 06 2005 - 22:00:51 GMT-3