From: ciscozest (ciscozest@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Feb 03 2009 - 02:34:39 ARST
Sorry, I meant 2821 in dynamips mode.
I just changed my dynamips router to 2691 using router id 1.1.1.1 which is
not pingable and the neighbor router showed same error. IOS
c2691-is-mz.123-26.bin
Connected to Dynamips VM "R3" (ID 2, type c2691) - Console port
cisco 2691 (R7000) processor (revision 0.1) with 89088K/9216K bytes of
memory.
Processor board ID XXXXXXXXXXX
R7000 CPU at 80MHz, Implementation 39, Rev 2.1, 256KB L2, 512KB L3 Cache
*Mar 1 00:01:14.467: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
R3#
*Mar 1 00:01:24.287: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
R3#
*Mar 1 00:01:34.131: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
R3#
*Mar 1 00:01:43.891: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
R3#
*Mar 1 00:01:53.359: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
R3#
*Mar 1 00:02:02.583: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
R3#
*Mar 1 00:02:11.771: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
R3#
*Mar 1 00:02:21.395: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/
R3#
*Mar 1 00:02:30.895: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
R3#
*Mar 1 00:02:35.939: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
R3#
*Mar 1 00:02:45.147: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
R3#
*Mar 1 00:02:54.631: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
R3#
*Mar 1 00:02:59.631: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
R3#
*Mar 1 00:03:09.131: %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type
1, Length 60, LSID 1.1.1.1 from 1.1.1.1, 172.10.13.1, FastEthernet0/0
!@#$% i am clueless now :(
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 1:23 PM, Pavel Bykov <slidersv@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, routerid can't exactly affect LSA type, unless there is a deeper
> problem.
> You said Dynamips and then 2821, so you tested on both?
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 8:59 AM, ciscozest <ciscozest@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I just tested with dynamips with OSPF only. Without pingable OSPF router
>> ID,
>> I got this error at th neighbor router.
>> %OSPF-4-BADLSATYPE: Invalid lsa: Bad LSA chksum Type 1, Length 60,
>> LSID /.......
>>
>> Not sure if this is bug with dynamips or this is the requirement. Can
>> anyone
>> verify this?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 8:11 AM, ciscozest <ciscozest@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > 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 <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: swm@emanon.com [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" <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: jscrivener@ipexpert.com
>> > >
>> > >-----Original Message-----
>> > >From: nobody@groupstudy.com [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 <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
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> > >> 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)
>> > www.MicronicsTraining.com <http://www.micronicstraining.com/> <
>> http://www.micronicstraining.com/>
>> > www.Net-Workbooks.com <http://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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Pavel Bykov
> ----------------
> Don't forget to help stopping the braindumps, use of which reduces value of
> your certifications. Sign the petition at http://www.stopbraindumps.com/
Blogs 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