From: John (jgarrison1@austin.rr.com)
Date: Tue Mar 04 2008 - 17:20:46 ARST
First rip is changing the AD of the redistributed ospf routes to 109, which
would have nothinbg to do with redistributed rip routes making a loop back
to the originating router(unless I have adresses in both routing domains).
It will however make the redistribution point(router) prefer redistributed
ospf routes over native ospf routes I don't have rouge routes in fact it's
almost impossible to tell whats right or wrong because of the flakeyness of
the BB routers in IE racks. The one thing I do know is the rip routes were
not making a loop thru the ospf domain back to the original redistribution
point. As far as taking out my frustration on people, I was simply stating
facts and trying to make the situation as clear as possible. Looks like I
didn't do a good job since I'm talking to you about redistributed rip routes
being redistributed back into ospf :-|
I'm trying to figure out the logic of changing the AD
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy" <and123and@googlemail.com>
To: "Sadiq Yakasai" <sadiqtanko@gmail.com>
Cc: "John" <jgarrison1@austin.rr.com>; "Hash Aminu" <hashng@gmail.com>;
"Carlos Alberto Trujillo Jimenez" <carlos.trujillo.jimenez@gmail.com>;
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 11:06 AM
Subject: Re: redistribution
> looks like the RIP originated routes are being advertised back to the
> RIP/OSPF router via OSPF, and the RIP/OSPF router obviously chooses OSPF,
> this is why you need RIP to be the preferred AD.
>
> This can happen even if you only have the one point of redsitribution
> between RIP and OSPF, in the RIP/OSPF router do a "sh ip route xxx" and
> see
> who is advertising the "rogue" route. I remember a lab with IE who had
> this
> very same scenario. A diag to see the bigger picture is what the guys are
> asking for, there is no need to take out your frustration on the guys
> trying
> to help :-|
>
>
> On 04/03/2008, Sadiq Yakasai <sadiqtanko@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hey John :) i think I got a hold of the scenario here, see if its wat
>> you are trying to explain:
>>
>> From what I understand here, you seem to have a loop in the OSPF
>> domain where the rip routes are redistributed in OSPF but they go into
>> the OSPF domain and have the potential of cycling and coming back to
>> this router that is actually redistributing these routes.
>>
>> When they come back to this router (if they do), they have the
>> potential of displacing the RIP routes and thereby disrupting this
>> routers belief of where the routes actually originated from because of
>> the fact that OSPF routes (AD 110) will displace RIP routes (AD 120).
>> Now the safest practice here is to make RIP routes have an AD of 109
>> so that no matter what, this router will always prefer the RIP
>> prefixes and will always redistribute them into OSPF.
>>
>> HTH
>>
>> Sadiq
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> 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 : Tue Apr 01 2008 - 07:53:52 ART