From: Todd, Douglas M. (DTODD@PARTNERS.ORG)
Date: Tue May 06 2008 - 17:48:21 ART
All depends on how granular you want to be.
Change internal only
Change external only
Change internal and External
Change routes only advertised by one advertiser
Change all routes by all advertisers
Change some routes by one advertiser
Change all advertisers but for some routes...
Different knobs... All get the job done.. Basically there is a good thread
floading around by Bruce Caslow (I believe) on redistribution techniques.
Keep internals preferred, but externals all depends on what you are asked and
your redistribution points.
No osculation of routes and you can ping everything and you meet the
requirements.... done.....
DMT
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of mac ccie
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 4:25 AM
To: Cisco certification
Subject: redistribution approach in case of OSPF and EIGRP externals
I have been using IE labs and most of the times I have seen similar approach for
dealing with redistribution problems arising due to redistributing EIGRP
external routes in OSPF at two points.
Their solution on most of the ocassions follow changing ospf external distance
to 171 so that eigrp external is preferred and then changing ospf external
prefixes AD(which is 171 now) to revert back to 110 using access lists.
According to me a more simpler approach could be to just change the ospf
distance directly for EIGRP external routes to 171 so that routers where we are
doing redistribution prefers EIGRP external (170) over ospf.
Why would we do this an introduce an extra configuration step?
1: Change ospf external to 171 so that say R1 and R2 prefer EIGRP for eigrp
externals.
2: Change original ospf external AD back to 110.
Instead of this
Just change ospf distance original EIGRP external prefixes to 171. distance ospf
171 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 ACL so that R1 and R2 prefer EIGRP for EIGRP
external routes ans ospf for original ospf external routes.
I know there could be multiple solutions to such problem but I just want to make
sure that I am not missing any possible problem arising because of using second
solution.
Any suggestions ?
Thanks,
Mac
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jun 02 2008 - 06:59:16 ART