From: WorkerBee (ciscobee@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Jul 03 2006 - 14:21:54 ART
Running a different EIGRP AS in your 6500 with redistribution adds
complexity and does not improve scalability. Remember EIGRP query
scope will extend even if you define different EIGRP AS because you
did a redistribution. Usually I don't design different EIGRP ASes and
connecting them up using redistribution. Is like, making EIGRP looks
like hierarchy based OSPF which it isn't.
Dynamic is not useful because if you LAN (6500) flaps, it causes
changes to the EIGRP routes in 3725/3745 and indirect flap the WAN
BGP. If there is dampening set at BGP, you may DoS yourself.
The best way is to define static routes in 3725 and set to "permanent"
keyword and redistribute static into EIGRP via route-map/filter. This
is the most stable setup assuming your LAN network is not dynamic in
nature.
I would still prefer static setup over dynamic routing.
On 7/4/06, Leigh Harrison <ccileigh@gmail.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> I have an issue with a customer. We've designed them a big new LAN and
> they are more than happy with it. The problem lies with the WAN link
> and the person who looks after the WAN links for the customer. The
> layout is like this:-
>
> 6509 - - - 6509
> | |
> - - 3725 - -
> - - -| | - - -
> | |
> 3745 - - - 3745
>
> If the diagram doesn't come out right, I have 2 x 6509's at the core of
> the LAN. They both connect on point to point links to a 3725 and the
> 3725 connects to 2 x 3745's which connect to the WAN. There is plans to
> put a second 3725 in place soon after this has gone in.
>
> The 3745's and the 3725 are managed by the WAN provider, but the
> customer is giving them the config that he'd like on the 3725.
>
> EIGRP runs between the 3725 and the 3745's and BGP runs over the 3745
> and the WAN.
>
> I suggested to my customer that we run a different EIGRP process (or
> OSPF) beween the 2 6509's and the 3725 (and the future 2nd 3725),
> redistributing, using routem-maps between the two protocols on the
> 3725. However, my customers WAN guy wanted to have static routing
> between the 6509's and the 3725. I went in to see them on Friday and
> configured up a test bed to prove that it will work no problems.and all
> seemed well. I then got a mail this morning from the WAN guy stating
> that he's not happy with dynamic routing and thinks that static is much
> better.
>
> I would appreciate any comments that I could use in the defense of using
> dynamic routing over static routing in this situation?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> LH
> #15331
>
>
> PS - The WAN guy is in the process of studying for a CCNP and his main
> concern is routes "leaking" into the WAN...
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Aug 01 2006 - 07:13:46 ART