From: James MacDonald (j4m3sm63@yahoo.ca)
Date: Tue Jan 20 2009 - 02:48:01 ARST
I didn't have time to re-lab this up ... but I reviewed the documentation again and it appears that IPv6 redistribution works slightly differently then IPv4 redistribution. In IPv4 when you redistribute routes the router does 2 things: (1) take the routes in the routing table from the protocol being redistributed AND (2) take the connected interfaces that that protocol is enabled on as well ... so it basically does a partial redistribute connected as in addition to the routes in the routing table by default. With IPv6 the default is to only perform the 1st step and you have the option to add "include-connected" which makes it act just like IPv4 does by default.
Interesting distinction since there could be a reason (or the task could tell you) you don't want to redistribute the loopback interfaces for instance ... so you would want to use include-connected as opposed to redistribute connected (of course you could add a route-map if you wanted) ...
From the docCD:
include-connected (Optional) Allows the target protocol to redistribute routes learned by
the source protocol and connected prefixes on those interfaces over
which the source protocol is running.
------------------------------
Jim MacDonald
j4m3sm63@yahoo.ca
------------------------------
________________________________
From: iSamuel <uniqsam@gmail.com>
To: James MacDonald <j4m3sm63@yahoo.ca>
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 6:26:38 PM
Subject: Re: IPV6 - redistribution
I thought there is a difference between two methods.First one just includes
connected interfaces that are running the source protocol and second one
includes all interfaces.
According to DOC CD,
"include-connected: Allows the target protocol to redistribute routes
learned by the source protocol and connected prefixes on those interfaces
over which the source protocol is running."
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Samuel.
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 8:31 PM, James MacDonald <j4m3sm63@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> Just did a lab asking for mutual redistribution of OSPFv3 and RIPng ... i
> used the following:
>
> ipv6 router ospf 1
> redistribute rip RIP include-connected
> ipv6 router rip RIP
> redistribute ospf 1 metric 1 include-connected
>
> ... verification seems to check out fine ... the solution seems to have a
> different approach:
>
> ipv6 router ospf 1
> redistribute rip RIP
> redistribute connected
> ipv6 router rip RIP
> redistribute ospf 1 metric 1
> redistribute connected metric 1
>
> ... is there any major difference in how these 2 methods perform? Is there
> a reason to use method 2 over method 1 (assuming you do want the connected
> routes also of course) ... i know both work, i'm just wondering if there is
> something extra special in the 2nd method i may need to know about.
>
> thanks,
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Jim MacDonald
> j4m3sm63@yahoo.ca
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> Instant Messaging, free SMS, sharing photos and more... Try the new Yahoo!
> Canada Messenger at http://ca.beta.messenger.yahoo.com/
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Mar 01 2009 - 09:43:39 ARST