From: Russell Kelly \(rukelly\) (rukelly@cisco.com)
Date: Fri Aug 11 2006 - 21:26:36 ART
I have a similar setup and it is working - can you do a sh ip route
then choose a particular network and do a sh ip route <network> ?
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
sabrina pittarel
Sent: 12 August 2006 01:13
To: Michael Stout; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: OSPF and the distance command
Yaah,
that works, but I'm back at square 0 in terms of preventing load
balancing using distance.
Maybe ospf doesn't like that 2 neighbors advertising the same external
route have different admin distance.
I would have expected some problem on internal routes, but not on
external/interarea ones, which behaves in distance vector-ish mode.
Well too bad, it would have been a cool thing.
Sabrina
--- Michael Stout <michaelgstout@hotmail.com> wrote:
---------------------------------
i don't know if the distance command works the way you are using it.
I use it like this.
access-list 1 permit 172.10.22.0 0.0.0.255 access-list 1 perm
172.10.34.0 0.0.0.255
I want to modify the distance for those two routes.
router ospf 1
distance 88 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 1 <-- one is the access-list
This method should change your distance to 88.
Do a clear ip route if you need to, but it will probubly change
immediatly.
debug ip routing to see your routing tables adjust to your changes
Good Luck
---------------------------------
From: sabrina pittarel <sabri_esame@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: sabrina pittarel <sabri_esame@yahoo.com>
To: Michael Stout <michaelgstout@hotmail.com>, ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: OSPF and the distance command
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:07:56 -0700 (PDT) Hi Michael, I know the
theory behind the use of the distance command, and I know that the
reason why the ping to R6 and/or R5 loopbacks fails because R1 sends the
echo request to R2 and even if it'll make it all the why to R4, R4 it'll
send it back to R3.
What puzzles me is why the router doesn't do what is supposed to in my
topology.
I'm explicitly telling him to set the distance to 109 for routes coming
from a particular route-source. Why the hell is not doing it!!
Sorry. It is driving me crazy.
Sabrina
--- Michael Stout <michaelgstout@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think you network is a good candidate for studying distannce.
>
> try this
> r1-----------r2---------r3------r4
> r1----------r6---------r5-------r4
> OSPF on top RIP on bottom>
> redistriburte mutually using default rip metric of
> 1>
> from r1 trace to R5 rip>
> You trace will go r2--r3--r4--r5
> that is because ospf has a better DISTANCE and r1 thinks the path to
> r5 is one hop away if it uses the ospf path but it thinks the path to
> R5 is
> 2 hops away if it takes the path through r6.
> You need distance so you use the native protocol
>
> Next ad loopbacks to R6 and R5.
> You will not be able to trace to the loopbacks from the ospf network
> You need to use distance to kill the loop
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: sabri_esame@yahoo.com
> Reply-To: sabri_esame@yahoo.com
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: OSPF and the distance command
> Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 17:50:07 -0400
> Hi all,
> I'm trying to understand how ospf behaves in relation with the
> following command:
>
> distance <#> <route-source> <wildcard> <acl>
>
> I have the following topology:
>
> R1 --------
> |
> R3
> |
> R2 --------
>
> R1, R2 and R3 are all in area 0. All routers have their loopbacks
> advertised in area0.
>
> R1 and R2 are also ASBRs and can reach the same set of external
> networks.
>
> I want to configure R3 in such a way it will forward all traffic for
> external networks to R2.
> I know I can accomplish that modifying the redistribution metrics in
> R1
> and R2, but as I said I'm trying to understand how the *distance*
> command behaves.
>
> I thought I could solve the problem doing the
> following:
>
> R3
> ---
>
> router ospf #
> distance 109 <R2 RID> 0.0.0.0 1
>
> access-list 1 deny <R1's loopback>
> access-list 1 permit any
>
> but it doesn't work.
>
> All external routes are still load balanced between R1 and R2 and
> show
> up in the routing table with AD 110.
> The only route with AD = 109 is R2's loopback. If I remove the acl
> from
> the distance command, i.e.
>
> distance 109 <R2 RID> 0.0.0.0
>
> also R1's loopback will be shown with distance 109 and R2 will be
> preferred (!!!). All other routes will still be load balanced and
> will have
> AD 110
>
> Only if I shut the link between R1 and R3 I finally see these routes
> with an AD of 109.
>
> I really don't understand what is going on, any ideas?
>
> Thanks
> Sabrina
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 01 2006 - 15:41:56 ART