From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Sun Nov 13 2005 - 13:24:27 GMT-3
No, that's not required. The interface in the middle would belong to a
different area. The virtual link is the "interface" belonging to area 0.
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Schulz, Dave
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2005 10:24 AM
To: Steve Schoeneman ; nobody@groupstudy.com
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Authentication in OSPF for area 0....virtual link
authentication???
So, then the question is....if I am doing authentication on virtual link, is
it required to have authentication on the link that is being used as the
virtual link? In other words, can I just use authentication on the virtual
link without authentication on the area 4 (as below)?
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com
To: Schulz, Dave
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Sent: 11/11/2005 7:20 AM
Subject: Re: Authentication in OSPF for area 0....virtual link
authentication???
You can put the authentication right in the virtual-link statement:
router ospf 10
area 0 authentication message-digest
area 3 authentication message-digest
area 4 authentication message-digest
area 4 virtual-link 10.6.6.6 message-digest-key 1 md5 cisco
In this example from this router is ABR in 3 & 4 with no connection to area
0 except the virtual link and the lab requires authentication on all links.
Steve
On 11/11/05, Schulz, Dave <DSchulz@dpsciences.com> wrote:
> I was thinking about all the ways that the lab could possibly ask for
> authentication in OSPF, and a thought came to mind....what if, they
ask to
> perform area 0 authentication, and, you happen do have a virtual link.
Would
> you also put authentication on the virtual link, like you would on a
tunnel
> that is part of area 0. Technically, you could call the virtual link
an
> "extension of area 0".
>
> Dave
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Dec 01 2005 - 09:12:06 GMT-3