From: Bogdan Sass (bogdan.sass@catc.ro)
Date: Thu Aug 21 2008 - 03:42:16 ART
Nitro Drops wrote:
> Hi All,
> Need to seek some kind advices on this task.
>
> 1.) When doing mutual redistribution between RIP and OSPF at R4, how
> come we do not have to lower down the distance of RIP from 120 to 119?
> In the past labs, eg Lab 3 Task 4.9, it is the same scenario of mutual
> redistribution between RIP and OSPF at one single point, instead of
> multiple points.
> R4
>
> router rip
>
> distance 109
>
I didn't get to lab 5, so I cannot answer all of your questions. But
I went through lab 3. And managed to get a routing loop, even though I
was sure that was impossible with a single point of redistribution
between RIP and OSPF.
After doing some checking (as in "a traceroute" :) ), I noticed that
the problem was not the rip->ospf distribution - it was in the
OSPF->EIGRP->OSPF redistribution. The RIP routes got passed into OSPF,
then into EIGRP on R2, then back into OSPF on R1. Causing R1 to accept
them as OSPF external routes, and trying to go through the OSPF domain
to reach those networks.
I can only assume that in lab 5 you do not get this kind of a
redistribution loop.
HTH,
-- Bogdan Sass CCAI,CCNP,CCSP,JNCIA-ER Information Systems Security ProfessionalBlogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Sep 01 2008 - 08:15:31 ART