From: Narbik Kocharians (narbikk@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Feb 01 2009 - 03:03:05 ARST
hahahaha
AGE
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 6:49 PM, swm@emanon.com <swm@emanon.com> wrote:
> Ahhhh... The fun stuff. Always good to cause some consternation. :)
>
> RFC 3630 - OSPF extensions for TE actually makes a few references to BGP as
> well, namely having to do with the BGP Router ID being set as the next-hop
> address (peer-id) for correlation purposes.
>
> So it looks like this is built into code now.
>
> Always good to know although I apparantly haven't been devious enough
> lately to run into a problem with it! (grin)
>
> But good to have the routers!
>
> Scott
>
> ---- Message from Hobbs <deadheadblues@gmail.com> at 2009-01-31 19:18:19
> ------
> >Well since I got rack session going on:
> >
> >R6(config)#router bgp 256
> >R6(config-router)#bgp router-id 0.0.0.1
> >%Invalid router-id 0.0.0.1
> >R6(config-router)#bgp router-id 255.255.255.255
> >%Invalid router-id 255.255.255.255
> >R6(config-router)#bgp router-id 224.0.0.1
> >%Invalid router-id 224.0.0.1
> >R6(config-router)#bgp router-id 223.255.255.255
> >R6(config-router)#
> >
> >R6#sho ver | inc bin
> >System image file is "flash:c2800nm-adventerprisek9-mz.124-3a.bin"
> >
> >
> >}\/\/{
> >| |
> >(.)(.)
> >| C |)
> >(___/|
> > )__|
> > / \\
> > / \\
> >
> >:D
> >
> >On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 6:56 PM, swm@emanon.com <swm@emanon.com> wrote:
> >> The router-id in both is simply a 32-bit number.
> >>
> >> Your call.
> >>
> >> Scott
> >>
> >>
> >> ---- Message from "ciscozest" <ciscozest@gmail.com> at 2009-02-01
> 08:11:46
> >> ------
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>So in case of OSPF and BGP exist on the same router, does the router ID
> must
> >> be pingable or just a valid IPv4 address?
> >>>Thanks.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>From: Narbik Kocharians [mailto:narbikk@gmail.com]
> >>>Sent: Sunday, 1 February 2009 4:26 AM
> >>>To: ciscozest
> >>>Cc: swm@emanon.com; Jared Scrivener; Jason Madsen; Cisco certification;
> Cisco
> >> certification
> >>>Subject: Re: about OSPF router ID
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>I totally agree with Scott, the OSPF router id is a 32 bit dotted
> decimal
> >> number, it can be an IPv4 address, but it can also be any dotted decimal
> >> number like "0.0.0.1" for R1 and so forth.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>One problem that you may run in to (In a CCIE LAB) is when you have OSPF
> and
> >> BGP with synchronization enabled in an AS, the router that redistributes
> the
> >> BGP routes into OSPF must have the same router-id configured on both
> routing
> >> protocols (meaning OSPF and BGP router-id must be identical on that
> router)
> >> and in this case you won't be able to use anything other than a valid IP
> >> address, because BGP's router-id must be a valid IP address.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Hope this helped.
> >>>
> >>>On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 3:57 AM, ciscozest <mailto:ciscozest@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>Dear Scott, Jared, Roy and Jason,
> >>>
> >>>Thank you all for the input. Really appreciate that. Have a nice weekend
> :)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: mailto:swm@emanon.com [mailto:mailto:swm@emanon.com ]
> >>>Sent: Saturday, 31 January 2009 3:23 PM
> >>>To: Jared Scrivener; 'Jason Madsen'; 'ciscozest'
> >>>Cc: 'Cisco certification'; 'Cisco certification'
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Subject: RE: about OSPF router ID
> >>>
> >>>Actually, it not only doesn't need to be pingable, but it doesn't even
> need
> >> to be a valid IPv4 address. It's simply a 32-bit number.
> >>>
> >>>If you're bored, make your router-id's 240.1.1.1, 240.1.1.2, 240.1.1.3,
> etc.
> >> Definitely can't put that on an IP interface... Definitely can't ping
> it.
> >> But it works just fine.
> >>>
> >>>Jared's got a point about name lookups, but on the other hand, if you
> >> properly populate your DNS lookups you'll be good on that one!
> >>>
> >>>Real life, most people use a loopback, whatever your main management
> >> interface happens to be. Just keeps things simple. But it's just a
> 32-bit
> >> number, so the fact that it relates to an actual IP address is for OUR
> >> benefit, not the routers'!
> >>>
> >>>Scott
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>---- Message from "Jared Scrivener" <mailto:jscrivener@ipexpert.com >
> at
> >> 2009-01-30 21:25:18 ------
> >>>>Whilst it is true that an OSPF Router ID doesn't have to be pingable,
> it
> >>>>generally makes life easier to use a reachable IP (normally Loopback
> 0).
> >>>>
> >>>>Let's say that you are asked to also turn on "ip ospf domain-lookup"
> which
> >>>>will translate your neighbor's Router-ID into a DNS name (which will
> either
> >>>>be defined by a hosts file or received via DNS).
> >>>>
> >>>>If you do it via hosts entries and your are ALSO a DNS server then your
> DNS
> >>>>clients would receive an unreachable IP address when they ping via DNS
> >> name.
> >>>>
> >>>>I know that's a rare case, but given the nature of question
> interdependency
> >>>>on the lab (and the evil nature of workbook vendors) I personally use
> L0 as
> >>>>my OSPF Router-ID (and set it manually using the "router-id" command)
> every
> >>>>time unless otherwise directed.
> >>>>
> >>>>Cheers,
> >>>>
> >>>>Jared Scrivener CCIE3 #16983 (R&S, Security, SP), CISSP
> >>>>Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
> >>>>Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
> >>>>Fax: +1.810.454.0130
> >>>>Mailto: mailto:jscrivener@ipexpert.com
> >>>>
> >>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>From: mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:mailto:
> nobody@groupstudy.com ]
> >> On Behalf Of
> >>>>Jason Madsen
> >>>>Sent: Friday, 30 January 2009 9:01 PM
> >>>>To: ciscozest
> >>>>Cc: Cisco certification; Cisco certification
> >>>>Subject: Re: about OSPF router ID
> >>>>
> >>>>OSPF Router IDs can be any UNIQUE IPv4 address...they don't have to be
> >>>>addresses assigned to an interface.
> >>>>
> >>>>On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 6:56 PM, ciscozest <mailto:ciscozest@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Hi all,
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I read Cisco press book stated that OSPF router ID do not need to be
> >>>>> pingable. In this case if I use a router ID which is not assigned to
> any
> >>>>> interface on that router, would this cause any issue such as OSPF
> >>>>> adjacency,
> >>>>> LSA table advertisement, etc? Has anyone do this before and can
> enlighten
> >>>>> me? Thanks.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net/"
> >>>target="_blank
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> >>>>> Subscription information may be found at:
> >>>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net/
> >>>>
> >>>>_______________________________________________________________________
> >>>>Subscription information may be found at:
> >>>>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>>>
> >>>>_____________________________________________________________________
> >>>>Subscription information: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/comserv.html
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>Internal Virus Database is out of date.
> >>>Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com/
> >>>Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.10/1905 - Release Date:
> 2009/1/20
> >> 14:34
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net/
> >>>
> >>>_______________________________________________________________________
> >>>Subscription information may be found at:
> >>>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>--
> >>>Narbik Kocharians
> >>>CCSI#30832, CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security)
> >>>http://www.MicronicsTraining.com <http://www.micronicstraining.com/>
> www.MicronicsTraining.com <http://www.micronicstraining.com/>
> >>>http://www.Net-Workbooks.com <http://www.net-workbooks.com/>
> www.Net-Workbooks.com <http://www.net-workbooks.com/>
> >>>Sr. Technical Instructor
> >>>No virus found in this incoming message.
> >>>Checked by AVG i www.avg.com
> >>>Version: 8.0.233 / Virus Database: 270.10.16/1926 i Release Date:
> 01/30/09
> >> 17:31:00
> >>
> >>
> >> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> Subscription information may be found at:
> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
-- Narbik Kocharians CCSI#30832, CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security) www.MicronicsTraining.com www.Net-Workbooks.com Sr. Technical InstructorBlogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Mar 01 2009 - 09:44:09 ARST