From: Schulz, Dave (DSchulz@dpsciences.com)
Date: Wed Nov 09 2005 - 11:54:20 GMT-3
Ah! That first statement explains the way the router is thinking in
this case! Thanks, Chris.
Dave Schulz
Email: dschulz@dpsciences.com <mailto:dschulz@dpsciences.com%20>
________________________________
From: Chris Lewis [mailto:chrlewiscsco@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 9:39 AM
To: Schulz, Dave; De Witt, Duane; Dave Temkin; Dan Agache
Cc: Cisco certification
Subject: RE: OSPF Area 0 Tuneling
OSPF performs subnet number and mask checks on all media except point to
point and virtual lilnks (RFC2328 section 10.5).
If one was crazy enough to change the interface to a broadcast network
type, the neighbor relationship would not be able to form.
Chris
"Schulz, Dave" <DSchulz@dpsciences.com> wrote:
Interesting! Trying to think like the router on this one, can
someone
explain how this would possible be acceptable? Doesn't the
tunnel look
like a circuit to this scenario? Doesn't it have to be on the
same
subnet?
Dave Schulz,
Email: dschulz@dpsciences.com
-----Original Message-----
From: De Witt, Duane [mailto:duane.dewitt@siemens.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 9:04 AM
To: Schulz, Dave; Dave Temkin; Dan Agache
Cc: Cisco certification
Subject: RE: OSPF Area 0 Tuneling
Well, according to the IE solution you can. (150.1.3.3/24 and
150.1.4.4/24 on the endpoints of the tunnel) I haven't labbed it
yet,
I'll quickly change my tunnels to match their solution and see
how it
works.
-----Original Message-----
From: Schulz, Dave [mailto:DSchulz@dpsciences.com]
Sent: 09 November 2005 03:57 PM
To: Dave Temkin; Dan Agache
Cc: De Witt, Duane; Cisco certification
Subject: RE: OSPF Area 0 Tuneling
This brings up a question....Since the tunnel is specifically
being used
to extend area 0, and the tunnel must have both ends in the same
subnet.
Doesn't this tunnel have to be an assigned ip address that is on
the
same subnet (both ends of the tunnel)? And, this subnet would
then have
to be assigned to area 0. Can this even be done with ip
unnumbered?
Dave Schulz,
Email: dschulz@dpsciences.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
Behalf Of
Dave Temkin
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 8:15 AM
To: Dan Agache
Cc: De Witt, Duane; Cisco certification
Subject: Re: OSPF Area 0 Tuneling
Be sure to read the wording of the lab carefully. They may (or
may not)
allow you to create additional IP addressing within a certain
scope, as
needed.
Using ip unnumbered to a loopback isn't all that great of an
idea, as
your
loopbacks will generally be in different subnets.
-Dave
On Wed, 9 Nov 2005, Dan Agache wrote:
> I think that you have to use all that the lab is given,
nothing more.
Using another subnet address is extra commands and is not a good
idea.
That's my opinion.
>
>
> "De Witt, Duane" wrote:
> Hi Group
>
>
>
> Quick question: in the lab if you have to join discontiguous
area 0's
> with tunnels is it better to use ip unnumbered loopback 0
(assuming
> loopback 0 is in area 0) or a new IP address and add the new
subnet to
> area 0 as well as the loopback.
>
>
>
> I'm asking this because in IEWB V2 Lab3, area 0 consists of
the
loopback
> interface of each router. So a tunnel was used using ip
unnumbered
> loopback 0. My solution was to create a new subnet for the
tunnel and
> add it to area 0.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Duane
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________
> SIEMENS Siemens Business Services
> Siemens Service Center
>
> 126 14th Road
>
> Erand Gardens
>
> Midrand
>
> South Africa
>
>
>
> * +27 11 5452555
> * +27 83 4452768
> * +27 11 5415219
> * duane.dewitt@siemens.com
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Dec 01 2005 - 09:12:05 GMT-3