From: Kim teu (kim.teu@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Dec 22 2007 - 12:03:30 ART
When you said "I find no apparent difference in any routing table... ", I
assume you mean the routing table of the router that's adjacent to the
router you perform redistribution because if you look at the routing table
that you perform redistribution on, you shouldn't see any difference. One
way to find out on the redistribution router is to do "sho ip route x.x.x.x"
to see if a particular interface IP is being redistributed or not.
HTH,
Kim
On 12/21/07, Scott M Vermillion <scott@it-ag.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Kim,
>
>
> Just to clarify, there was a separate task to redistribute my Lo0 into
> OSPF early on in the lab (and the task requirement can only be met via
> redistribution a network statement or 'ip ospf 100 area 0' at the
> interface level are both expressly prohibited). Then, separately, at the
> end of the IGP section, I'm to redistribute OSPF into RIP and RIP into
> OSPF. In the SG, they have 'redistribute connected' under the RIP process.
> A brief mention is made in the lab breakdown video that this is because of
> the earlier redistribution of connected into OSPF. However, I find no
> apparent difference in any routing table regardless of this commands
> presence or absence under RIP. Of course, it's been a long day and I
> haven't been focused at all since I started out this morning. So maybe a
> good night's sleep will help. Also, I'll try to navigate back to that
> section of the IE ATC CoD. I remember this being discussed at length but I
> apparently don't yet have it all committed to memory
>
>
>
> Thanks much,
>
>
> Scott
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Kim teu [mailto:kim.teu@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, December 21, 2007 10:41 PM
> *To:* Scott M Vermillion
> *Cc:* ccielab@groupstudy.com
> *Subject:* Re: Has Redistribution Behavior Changed Or Am I High?
>
>
>
> Scott,
>
> The "redistribute connec route-map LOOPBACK_ONLY" should be under RIP
> process, not OSPF process. Then, when you redistribute ospf under RIP,
only
> loopback interface get redistributed, but not other OSPF enabled
interfaces.
>
>
>
>
> HTH,
>
> Kim
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 12/21/07, *Scott M Vermillion* <scott@it-ag.com> wrote:
>
> OK folks, admittedly a soft spot in my underbelly here.
>
>
>
> Redistribution rules as I have come to understand them (not necessarily in
>
> any kind of order):
>
>
>
> --redistribute any routes learned from the protocol being redistributed
>
> --redistribute any connected interfaces that are covered by network
> statement under the protocol being redistributed
>
> --however, if a 'redistribute connected' statement exists in the protocol
> being redistributed, only redistribute those connected interfaces which
> are
> allowed in the manual 'redistribute connected' statement
>
>
>
> So, for example, if I have router R1 running both RIP and OSPF, and I have
> redistributed my loopback interface into OSPF with a route-map permitting
> *only* the loopback to go into OSPF, then if I then later redistribute
> OSPF
> into RIP, I will get all routes learned by OSPF in RIP but I will not get
> the networks of directly connected links/interfaces running OSPF, because
> my
> route-map didn't encompass anything but the loopback interface.
>
> I thought I finally understood this concept correctly. Do I?
>
>
>
> Because in my lab, I'm not seeing this. I have the exact scenario above
> configured. In a Solutions Guide, it shows doing a 'redistribute
> connected'
> under the RIP process, presumably in an effort to pull in directly
> connected
> non-RIP/OSPF networks as well as those *learned* by OSPF. Right? Or
> wrong?
> Because I am observing zero difference whether this manual redistribution
> of
> connected exists under the RIP process or not. I do in fact seem to get
> the
> directly connected non-RIP/OSPF networks showing up in and being
> advertised
> into RIP, even sans a manual redistribution of connected under RIP.
>
>
>
> So I ask you once again, am I on something good? Are my pupils perhaps a
> little dilated this evening? Please advise.
>
>
>
> Regards all,
>
> Scott
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jan 01 2008 - 12:04:31 ARST