Re: P-t-P or P-t-M?

From: simone schiassi (simone.ciscolab@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Mar 28 2006 - 19:32:51 GMT-3

• Next message: Vishal Patel: "OT:voice config"
• Previous message: simone schiassi: "Re: P-t-P or P-t-M?"
• Maybe in reply to: simone schiassi: "P-t-P or P-t-M?"
• Next in thread: Alexei Monastyrnyi: "Re: P-t-P or P-t-M?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

2006/3/28, Brian McGahan <bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com>:
>
> What is the difference in the OSPF network type between a main
> interface and a point-to-point subinterface? How does this affect your
> design considerations?
>
> Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593
> bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
>
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
> http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
> Toll Free: 877-224-8987 x 705
> Outside US: 775-826-4344 x 705
> 24/7 Support: http://forum.internetworkexpert.com
> Live Chat: http://www.internetworkexpert.com/chat/

 If the physical interface is the hub I can have problems with split-horizon
if I have a point-to-multipoint topology, because it's all configured under
one subnet.
If the phyical interface is one of the spokes I can configure the network
type either point-to-point or point-to-multipoint in order to match the
other end's type of network.

Where's the point you wanted me to get to?

thank you

• Next message: Vishal Patel: "OT:voice config"
• Previous message: simone schiassi: "Re: P-t-P or P-t-M?"
• Maybe in reply to: simone schiassi: "P-t-P or P-t-M?"
• Next in thread: Alexei Monastyrnyi: "Re: P-t-P or P-t-M?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 01 2006 - 10:07:40 GMT-3