From: Stefan Grey (examplebrain@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Aug 01 2006 - 09:54:06 ART
Yes you are all wright. I just forgot... but correct me if I am wrong....
Prefix lengths should always bigger then a subnetwork length. And if it is
smaller that we should always add something like le 24 ge 24 at the end.
Correct??
>From: "Victor Cappuccio" <cvictor@protokolgroup.com>
>To: "'Stefan Grey'" <examplebrain@hotmail.com>, <curt.girardin@chicos.com>,
> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: RE: Prefix-list RIP and redistribution
>Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 08:50:38 -0400
>
>
>Stefan, I could be wrong but I think that the Prefix-list that you are
>looking is something like ip prefix-list X seq 5 permit 111.1.0.0/21 ge 24
>le 24
>
>-----Mensaje original-----
>De: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] En nombre de
>Stefan
>Grey
>Enviado el: Martes, 01 de Agosto de 2006 07:28 a.m.
>Para: curt.girardin@chicos.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Asunto: RE: Prefix-list RIP and redistribution
>
>loopback 111: 111.1.1.1/24
>loopback 112: 111.1.2.1/24
>loopback 113: 111.1.3.1/24
>Loopback 114: 111.1.4.1/24
>..
>..
>..
>Loopback 117:111.1.7.1/24
>
>
> >From: "Curt Girardin" <curt.girardin@chicos.com>
> >To: "Stefan Grey" <examplebrain@hotmail.com>,<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Subject: RE: Prefix-list RIP and redistribution
> >Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 07:02:10 -0400
> >
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >What is the exact subnet mask of your connected loopback addresses as
> >listed in the routing table? The prefix-list as you've configured in
> >option B must also make an EXACT 21-bit match on the SUBNET MASK also.
> >That is the beauty of prefix-lists - that they are more granular in that
> >they look at the subnet mask in addition to the network address.
> >
> >If your subnet mask on your loopback interface are /24's, then I would
> >suggest using:
> >
> >ip prefix-list NEW permit 111.1.0.0/24
> >
> >HTH,
> >
> >Curt
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> >Stefan Grey
> >Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 5:47 AM
> >To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >Subject: Prefix-list RIP and redistribution
> >
> >Hello guys!
> >
> >
> >lo - R1 - R2 -lo
> >
> >I have rip configured between R1 and R2. I also configured some
> >loopbacks interfaces on R1 with IP addresses of: 111.1.x.0
> >(x=1,2,3,4,5,6,7). I want redistribute this directly connected
> >interfaces into RIP so that R2 has the route to it.
> >
> >I configure: router rip
> >redistribute connected metric 2 route-map NEWCONNECTED:
> >
> >Question:
> >If I use configuration A everything works just fine:
> >A:
> >access-list 2 permit 111.1.0.0 0.0.7.255 route-map NEWCONNECTED permit
> >10 match ip address 2
> >
> >But if I use configuration B nothig is redistributed, and R2 doesn't see
> >any routes from R1:
> >b:
> >ip prefix-list NEW permit 111.1.0.0/21
> >route-map NEWCONNECTED permit 10
> >match ip address prefix-list NEW.
> >
> >Why ip prefix-list doesn't match this routes. I just can't understand
> >what is ther reason of such behaviour. Could anybody please explain.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Find accommodation FAST with MSN Search! http://search.msn.ie/
> >
> >_______________________________________________________________________
> >Subscription information may be found at:
> >http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Find a baby-sitter FAST with MSN Search! http://search.msn.ie/
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 01 2006 - 15:41:56 ART