From: Biggs, Jeff \(M/CIO/BIE\) (JBiggs@usaid.gov)
Date: Thu Oct 25 2007 - 09:38:39 ART
Thank you all for the input.....it finally seems to be sinking in when
you see it broken down. That is how my mind works, see it start from
scratch and work it upward.
Thanks again.
Jeffrey Biggs
Sr. Network Engineer
USAID
M/CIO/BIE
240-646-5003
jbiggs@usaid.gov
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Scott Morris
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 3:14 AM
To: bdennis@internetworkexpert.com; 'Scott Vermillion'; 'Herbert Maosa';
'Joseph Brunner'; 'Jeffrey Biggs'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Redistribution with route tags are KILLING ME!!!`
Just noting experience watching/teaching people, that's all.
One number isn't complex when you look at it that way, but when you look
at
it as two things to think about versus one, it's adding to the
complexity.
Multiple ways to solve a puzzle though, not trying to draw fine lines!
(An
artist I am not!)
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
JNCIE-M
#153, JNCIS-ER, CISSP, et al.
CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-ER
VP - Technical Training - IPexpert, Inc.
IPexpert Sr. Technical Instructor
A Cisco Learning Partner - We Accept Learning Credits!
smorris@ipexpert.com
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Fax: +1.810.454.0130
http://www.ipexpert.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Dennis [mailto:bdennis@internetworkexpert.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 2:44 AM
To: Scott Morris; 'Scott Vermillion'; 'Herbert Maosa'; 'Joseph Brunner';
'Jeffrey Biggs'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Redistribution with route tags are KILLING ME!!!`
So the difference between something complex (tag using device# + AD) and
something simple (tag using only AD) is only 1 digit? Seems like a
pretty
fine line you've drawn there ;-)
Brian Dennis, CCIE4 #2210 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/SP)
bdennis@internetworkexpert.com
Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987
Direct: 775-745-6404 (Outside the US and Canada)
>----- Original Message -----
Subject: RE: Redistribution with route tags are KILLING ME!!!`
Date: Wed, October 24, 2007 22:15
From: "Scott Morris" <smorris@ipexpert.com>
> If you have multiple routers redistributing the same routes adding the
> device number to the tag may be a necessary thing, but in a simpler
> rule does it help any? (e.g. personal choice) :)
>
> Let's not make things more thought provoking than necessary. In my
> experience watching people use tags and working through redistribution
> problems, it's easier for them to remember AD values as that has more
likely
> been ingrained in their brains for years thereby reducing the thought
> processes needed to come up with tags or watch things happen.
>
> Both obviously work perfectly fine, I simply look at it for
simplicity.
>
> The tag for connected is an interesting idea.... I'd never thought of
that,
> but likely because I never worried about a routing look with connected
> interfaces before. But an interesting idea!
>
>
> Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider)
> #4713,
JNCIE-M
> #153, JNCIS-ER, CISSP, et al.
> CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-ER
> VP - Technical Training - IPexpert, Inc.
> IPexpert Sr. Technical Instructor
>
> A Cisco Learning Partner - We Accept Learning Credits!
>
> smorris@ipexpert.com
>
> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
> http://www.ipexpert.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of Brian Dennis
> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 11:46 PM
> To: Scott Vermillion
> Cc: 'Herbert Maosa'; 'Joseph Brunner'; 'Jeffrey Biggs';
> ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Redistribution with route tags are KILLING ME!!!`
>
> If you are going to tag use the device number plus the administrative
> distance of the routes being redistributed (i.e. R2 OSPF = 2110 or R6
> connected = 60).
>
> Also we have a free route redistribution vseminar on November 14th
> that's open to everyone. We'll limit this vseminar to only 300 people
> so sign up early if you are interested as the last one on Catalyst QoS
> pushed the limits of the vseminar software ;-)
>
> --
>
> Brian Dennis, CCIE4 #2210 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/SP)
> bdennis@internetworkexpert.com
>
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
> http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
> Toll Free: 877-224-8987
> Direct: 775-852-3995 (Outside the US and Canada)
>
> Scott Vermillion wrote:
> > I don't know, I thought Scott Morris's idea of tagging all routes
> > with
> their
> > "native" AD was quite brilliant. Sure makes things easy to keep
> > straight (although I confess I haven't done too much in the way of
> > redistribution labs at this juncture in my studies, so I'm certainly
> > no expert on the subject).
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> > Of Herbert Maosa
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 4:37 PM
> > To: Joseph Brunner
> > Cc: Jeffrey Biggs; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Re: Redistribution with route tags are KILLING ME!!!`
> >
> > Actually, I use route-tags in two cases
> >
> > - one of the protocols is already carrying external routes from
> > elsewhere
> > - one of the protocols is RIP, which has no concept of External
> > routes
> >
> > Except for these two cases, so far I successfullly implement loop
> > free redistribution by matching internal routes ( in the case of
> > OSPF ) or matching route-type Internal ( for the case of EIGRP ).
> >
> > I think the use of route-tags is generally overused, perhaps
> > overtrained,
> so
> > much so that you end up using it on every redistribution scenario
> > without understanding what you are trying to accomplish. Could waste
> > quite a lot
> of
> > time at the best, and you could get it all wrong at the worst !
> >
> > .
> > Herbert.
> >
> > On 10/24/07, Joseph Brunner <joe@affirmedsystems.com> wrote:
> >> Wait slow down...
> >>
> >> You only NEED to use redistribution with route-tags when you have
> >> more than
> >> 1 router doing mutual route re-distribution. We use the tags to
> >> block route feedback. That is, if a route has been redistributed
> >> already at either router it wont be re-redistributed back to the
> >> source protocol at the other router.
> >>
> >> Here is an example... R3 and R4 are redistributing between EIGRP
& OSPF.
> >> To
> >> prevent a loop we don't allow route feedback from a protocol back
> >> into a protocol. Anything going from OSPF to EIGRP, and EIGRP to
> >> OSPF is tagged and the redistribution at other router denies routes
> >> with that tag before redistribution. The tags allow us to know
> >> WHERE that route originally
> came
> >> from.
> >>
> >> Here is the topology
> >>
> >> R1---OSPF--- R3--- EIGRP-AS-10--- R5
> >> | |
> >> R2---OSPF--- R4--- EIGRP-AS-10--- R6
> >>
> >>
> >> R3&R4
> >>
> >> Router ospf 1
> >> Redis eigrp 10 subnets route-map watch-tag
> >>
> >> Router eigrp 10
> >> Redistribute ospf 1 route-map watch-tag metric 1500 100 255 1 1500
> >>
> >> Route-map watch-tag deny 5
> >> Match tag 5
> >> Route-map watch-tag permit 10
> >> Set tag 5
> >>
> >>
> >> Try it with my topology in your dynamips...
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
> >> Behalf Of Jeffrey Biggs
> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 4:48 PM
> >> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >> Subject: Redistribution with route tags are KILLING ME!!!`
> >>
> >> I have been trying to grasp the use of redistribution using only
> >> route tags, but I just keep getting killed by it. I can
> >> redistribute using prefix-lists and ACL's all day long, but I know
> >> I am going to see something where I need to "make sure all IP's are
> >> fully reachable without the use of ACL's/Prefix-lists" and I am
> >> going go down in flames..Is there someone
> out
> >> there that has a solution that can help me??????? I have used NMC
> >> and IPEXPERT (BOTH VERY GOOD TOOLS, NOT KNOCKING ANY OTHERS) but my
> >> brain is just not grasping the concept.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> HELP!!!!!!!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> JB
> >>
> >> ___________________________________________________________________
> >> ____ Subscription information may be found at:
> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>
> >> ___________________________________________________________________
> >> ____ Subscription information may be found at:
> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > ___ Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > ___ Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _ Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _ Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Nov 16 2007 - 13:11:18 ART