From: ccie1101 (ccie1101@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Aug 14 2007 - 23:39:08 ART
1) My thaught process was that the 'distance 109' was put inside RIP because
the AD for OSFP is 110 and since RIP has an AD of 120, by lowering to 109,
the OSPF routes can come into RIP ..... Is my understanding right ?
2) Also there are cases that I have seen in the workboook that ospf is
redistributed without having the
'distance 109' in it .... So what is the right way to go abt. this ?
Thanks guys,
ccie1101.
On 8/15/07, Bajo <bajoalex@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi CCIE1101,
>
> You are lowering the ospf distance below rip, because you do not want
> the distributed routes from rip to come back to rip ..because ospf
> (110) is more trusted than rip (120).
>
> So you are avoiding 1) sub-optimal and 2) looping (black hole) issues.....
>
> HTH,
> Bajo
>
> On 8/14/07, ccie1101 <ccie1101@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi GS,
> > I am confused about redistribution between rip and ospf .... *1)*
> My
> > question is that when we redistribute between RIP and OSPF, do we need
> to
> > lower the AD to 109 so that ospf routes can be redistributed into rip or
> *Case
> > 2* would work ? *2)* Under which scneario should we use the 'distance
> 109'
> > command under the router rip mode ?
> >
> > *Case 1*:
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > router rip
> > distance 109
> > redistribute ospf 1 metric 1
> > !
> > !
> > router ospf 1
> > redistribute rip subnets
> > !
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > *Case 2*:
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > router rip
> > redistribute ospf 1 metric 1
> > !
> > router ospf 1
> > redistribute rip subnets
> > !
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > ccie1101.
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
>
>
> --
> Kind Regards,
>
> Bajo
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 01 2007 - 11:32:11 ART