From: D.H. Williams (draythw@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Jun 26 2006 - 11:15:42 ART
To my understanding, the only stipulation of using (a) below, is that if you
added another interface with an IP that falls into that range (192.168.1.0),
then it will be advertised into OSPF ... this, of course, may or may not be
desirable. The lab might ask to be as specific as possible, or it may not
care, and just want the interfaces it references to be in OSPF.
OSPFv3 does the same thing as the network command, except (at least in my
opinion) it is more logical in that you actually enable ospf under the
interface. The network command in v2 is just stating which interfaces to
include in the OSPF process.
On 6/26/06, Radioactive Frog <pbhatkoti@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Group,
>
> The scenario is as below:
>
>
> 192.168.1.0/27--------------192.168.1.65/30---------192.168.1.66/30----------192.168.1.32/27
> --------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Router-A
> --------------WAN---------------------- Router-B
>
> The question is how would you advertise the network? The options are as
> under:
>
> a) Router-A
> -------------
> Router ospf 10
> network 192.168.1.0 area 0
>
> Router-B
> -------------
> Router ospf 10
> network 192.168.1.0 area 0
>
>
> b)
> Router-A
> ----------------
> router ospf 10
> rnetwork 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.31 area 0
> network 192.168.1.65 0.0.0.3 area 0
>
> Router-B
> ----------------
> router ospf 10
> rnetwork 192.168.1.32 0.0.0.31 area 0
> network 192.168.1.65 0.0.0.3 area 0
>
>
> In pratical both works but just want to know what are the benifit of
> having
> one or other ?
>
> Frog
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 01 2006 - 07:57:33 ART