Re: Router-IDs on routing protocols

Hi Joe,

Thank you for the answer, I have the same opinion about this. But my
question was more in the line of is there a danger of losing points if
doing so.

Cheers,
Florian

2010/6/17 Joe Astorino <joe_astorino_at_comcast.net>:
> I would do it for a few reasons
>
> 1) It makes your life easier during troubleshooting and debugging (seeing a
> RID that is very familiar as opposed to some random highest IP address).
> Example: "show ip ospf neighbor"
>
> 2) Bad things can happen with OSPF should you choose not to. What if you
> have virtual-links which are of course configured based on RID in OSPF. If
> the RID is the highest loopback / highest IP address and you happen to add
> another higher one later and then reload your connectivity back to area 0
> can be screwed.
>
> For these reasons I always got in the habit of hard coding them in labs, but
> do what you are comfortable with
>
> Regards,
> Joe Astorino, CCIE #24347
>
> "He not busy being born is busy dying" -- Dylan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Florian Frotzler" <florian_at_frotzler.priv.at>
> To: "Cisco certification" <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 5:33:51 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: Router-IDs on routing protocols
>
> Hi group,
>
> Is it a good practice in the SP lab to generally configure router-IDs
> on all routing protocols even if it is not demanded by the task (and
> also not explicitely forbidden of course)? Or does this contradict the
> idea of "configure only what is necessary".
>
> Cheers,
> Florian
>
>
> 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
Received on Thu Jun 17 2010 - 15:32:02 ART