thanks salah,
tags n route-maps are helpful if you have two redistribution points between
the same IGP protocols.
but i am talking about the scenario in which you have only 1 redistribution
point. using distance command on that point will cause me to loose points
even though if its not required?
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 12:49 AM, Salah ElShekeil <salah.elshekeil_at_gmail.com
> wrote:
> It depends but I prefer using tag and route-maps as far as I know it's
> the best way,
>
>
>
> in addition to the distance command,
>
>
>
> INE vol 3 is for the core stuff, I strongly recommend you to lab it up
>
>
>
> Good luck
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 12:43 AM, Rameez Khan <rameezk1999_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Dear GS,
>>
>> Whenever i redistribute from a higher Administrative Distance Protocol
>> (RIP) to a lower administrative distance protocol (OSPF), i use "distance
>> ospf external 130" command in ospf routing process as a best practice to
>> avoid reflect back routes from causing a loop.
>>
>> Using this practice is useful, if the next downstream neighbor in OSPF
>> domain is a HUB with split horizon disabled.
>>
>> But if the downstream neighbor is a point-to-point end router, than using
>> the "distance command" does not make sense if the split horizon is
>> enabled.
>>
>> But as a safety measure can i use the "distance" command in the above
>> point
>> to point topology? what if the proctor disable split horizon the other
>> end,
>> it will help me in this situation?
>>
>> using "distance ospf external" command as a safety measure will cause me
>> to
>> loose points in the R/S lab even if it is not required??
>>
>> please answer
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Salah
> CCIE #24207
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Tue Jul 14 2009 - 00:58:03 ART
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sat Aug 01 2009 - 13:10:22 ART