Re: FW: OSPF Metric of > 65535??? WTF!

From: Marko Milivojevic <markom_at_ipexpert.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 19:28:27 +0000

Unless you misinterpret what IOS is telling you, that is :-)

--
Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427
Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert
FREE CCIE training: http://bit.ly/vLecture
Mailto: markom_at_ipexpert.com
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Web: http://www.ipexpert.com/
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 18:57, Larry Hadrava <larryh12203_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Bob - you just can't argue with proof by IOS / debug!!!
>
> Thanks
> Larry Hadrava
> CCIE #12203
> Check Out MyBlog: http://ccie12203.wordpress.com/
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Bob Sinclair <bob_at_bobsinclair.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> I think you will find that the maximum OSPF metric is actually 2^24. B  This
>> is the size of the metric field in the LSA.
>>
>> R5(config-router)#default-metric ?
>> B <1-16777214> B OSPF default metric
>>
>> Above shows maximum metric that can still be advertised. B BTW; B a metric of
>> 0 will also be advertised.
>>
>> Turn on debug ip ospf lsa-generation, kill an external route, and you will
>> see the LSA is withdrawn by advertising the poisoned metric, 16777215
>>
>> R1#debug ip osp lsa-generation
>> OSPF summary lsa generation debugging is on
>> R1#
>> *Oct 19 18:47:02.867: BGP(0): route 158.10.107.0/24 modified
>> *Oct 19 18:47:02.991: OSPF: Generate external LSA 158.10.107.0, mask
>> 255.255.255.0, type 5, age 3600, metric 16777215, tag 0, metric-type 2, seq
>> 0x80000005
>>
>> HTH,
>>
>> Bob Sinclair CCIE 10427 CCSI 30427
>> CIERS2 Online Instructor
>> www.tinyurl.com/ciers2online
>>
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>> > Mike Kiefer
>> > Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 1:47 PM
>> > To: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
>> > Subject: OSPF Metric of > 65535??? WTF!
>> >
>> > I was always under the impression the maximum metric of OSPF is 65535.
>> > Anything beyond that wouldn't make it into the routing table. The
>> > behavior
>> > would be similar to a RIP route with a hop count of 16 that's
>> > considered
>> > unreachable.
>> >
>> > I noticed a few routes on our production network that exceeded 65535
>> > mainly
>> > because of network engineer stupidity.
>> >
>> > So I made a real simple lab in GNS3. R1 connects to R2 connects to R3.
>> > R1, R2,
>> > and R3 have 1.1.1.1, 2.2.2.2, and B 3.3.3.3 as loopbacks and all of the
>> > links
>> > are maxed out with ip ospf cost 65535.
>> >
>> >
>> > R1(config-if)#do sh ip route
>> > Codes: C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP
>> > B  B  B  B D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area
>> > B  B  B  B N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2
>> > B  B  B  B E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2
>> > B  B  B  B i - IS-IS, su - IS-IS summary, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS
>> > level-2
>> > B  B  B  B ia - IS-IS inter area, * - candidate default, U - per-user
>> > static
>> > route
>> > B  B  B  B o - ODR, P - periodic downloaded static route
>> >
>> > Gateway of last resort is not set
>> >
>> > B  B  B 1.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> > C B  B  B  1.1.1.1 is directly connected, Loopback0
>> > B  B  B 2.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> > O IA B  B 2.2.2.2 [110/131070] via 12.1.1.2, 00:07:10, FastEthernet0/0
>> > B  B  B 3.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> > O IA B  B 3.3.3.3 [110/196605] via 12.1.1.2, 00:02:11, FastEthernet0/0
>> > B  B  B 12.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> > C B  B  B  12.1.1.0 is directly connected, FastEthernet0/0
>> > B  B  B 13.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> > O B  B  B  13.1.1.0 [110/131070] via 12.1.1.2, 00:02:21, FastEthernet0/0
>> >
>> >
>> > R1(config-if)#do sh ip ospf data summ
>> >
>> > B  B  B  B  B  B  OSPF Router with ID (1.1.1.1) (Process ID 1)
>> >
>> > B  B  B  B  B  B  B  B  Summary Net Link States (Area 0)
>> >
>> > B  Routing Bit Set on this LSA
>> > B  LS age: 654
>> > B  Options: (No TOS-capability, DC, Upward)
>> > B  LS Type: Summary Links(Network)
>> > B  Link State ID: 2.2.2.2 (summary Network Number)
>> > B  Advertising Router: 2.2.2.2
>> > B  LS Seq Number: 80000002
>> > B  Checksum: 0xEE3D
>> > B  Length: 28
>> > B  Network Mask: /32
>> > B  B  B  B  TOS: 0 B Metric: 65535
>> >
>> > B  Routing Bit Set on this LSA
>> > B  LS age: 471
>> > B  Options: (No TOS-capability, DC, Upward)
>> > B  LS Type: Summary Links(Network)
>> > B  Link State ID: 3.3.3.3 (summary Network Number)
>> > B  Advertising Router: 3.3.3.3
>> > B  LS Seq Number: 80000001
>> > B  Checksum: 0xA480
>> > B  Length: 28
>> > B  Network Mask: /32
>> > B  B  B  B  TOS: 0 B Metric: 65535
>> >
>> > How do I get a routing metric > 65535? Why are both 2.2.2.2 and 3.3.3.3
>> > only
>> > showing 65535 in the DB and higher metrics in the routing table? Isn't
>> > the
>> > 65535 based on the fact that there are only 16 bits for metric?
>> >
>> > What gives???
>> >
>> >
>> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________________________________
>> > Subscription information may be found at:
>> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > No virus found in this incoming message.
>> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> > Version: 9.0.862 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3206 - Release Date:
>> > 10/19/10 02:34:00
>>
>>
>> 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
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Tue Oct 19 2010 - 19:28:27 ART

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Nov 01 2010 - 06:42:06 ART