From: Rich Collins (nilsi2002@gmail.com)
Date: Fri May 23 2008 - 10:55:08 ART
It's also unclear to me. Does R2 only have a connection to R1 and R4 and
not to R6 or R5? If so then there is no problem since R4 will always show
R2 as the next hop to get to those R1 RIP originated routes.
-Rich
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 9:58 PM, seyfert . <seyfert22@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I dont have a clear view about the topology, would u describe it more
> clearly...
> whether R4 is attach to R5,R2, and R6..
> may be..
> You can use table to create a clear view of topology
> ex:
>
> R1 attached to x,y,z
> etc...
>
> ..
>
> tks
>
> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 7:40 PM, Luca Hall <lhall@setnine.com> wrote:
>
> > R2 mutually redistributes RIP<->OSPF
> > R4 mutually redistributes EIGRP<->OSPF
> >
> > [R1]
> > e0/0 |
> > R
> > I
> > P
> > | e0/0
> > s0/0 -[R2]- s0/1
> > | |
> > O R
> > S I
> > P P
> > F |
> > | |
> > s0/0 \ / s0/1
> > [R6]-EIGRP--[R4]--RIP--[R5]
> > e0/0 e0/0 e0/1 e0/0
> >
> > R1 is sending 10 routes to R2, R2 then sends them
> > via RIP, redistributes them into OSPF and sends via OSPF.
> >
> > You want full reachability, my solution is set the RIP routes
> > on R4 learned by R2 to AD 109 (distance exact match)
> > to keep them in their own domain; then on R2 summarize them via OSPF
> > so R4 wont set their AD set to 109, the summaries will be
> > put into R4's routing table then redistributed into EIGRP.
> >
> > Is there any other/better ways to do this?
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > 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 : Mon Jun 02 2008 - 06:59:18 ART