Re: OSPF quiz

i think these 2 docs shed some light on this behavior...

The forwarding address is set to 0.0.0.0 if the ASBR redistributes routes
and OSPF is not enabled on the next hop interface for those routes

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a008009405a.shtml

The Effects of the Forwarding Address on Type 5 LSA Path Selection

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a0080124c7d.shtml

 --
Garry L. Baker

"With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine..." - RFC 1925

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Marko Milivojevic <markom_at_ipexpert.com>wrote:

> OK, let me continue with my teasing then.
>
> Here is the setup I have:
>
> R2 and R4 are "borders" and R5 is the branch office. Here is the
> configuration:
>
> R2:
> interface GigabitEthernet0/0
> ip address 192.168.24.2 255.255.255.0
> !
> interface Serial0/2/0
> ip address 192.168.25.2 255.255.255.0
> !
> ip route 192.168.42.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.24.254
> !
> router ospf 1
> redistribute static subnets route-map STA-to-OSP
> network 192.168.25.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> !
> route-map STA-to-OSP permit 10
> set metric 20
> set metric-type type-1
> !
>
>
> R4:
> interface FastEthernet0/0
> ip address 192.168.24.4 255.255.255.0
> !
> interface Serial0/1/0
> ip address 192.168.45.4 255.255.255.0
> !
> ip route 192.168.42.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.24.254
> !
> router ospf 1
> redistribute static subnets route-map STA-to-OSP
> network 192.168.45.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> !
> route-map STA-to-OSP permit 10
> set metric 40
> set metric-type type-1
> !
>
>
> R5:
> interface Serial0/0/0
> ip address 192.168.45.5 255.255.255.0
> !
> interface Serial0/2/0
> ip address 192.168.25.5 255.255.255.0
> !
> router ospf 1
> network 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 area 0
> !
>
>
> So, the result is as follows:
>
> R5#sh ip ro ospf
> O E1 192.168.42.0/24 [110/84] via 192.168.25.2, 01:22:13, Serial0/2/0
>
> Now, let me change ... just one thing on R2 and R4:
>
> R2 and R4:
> router ospf 1
> network 192.168.24.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
> !
>
> R5:
>
> R5#sh ip ro os
> O E1 192.168.42.0/24 [110/85] via 192.168.45.4, 00:00:01, Serial0/0/0
> [110/85] via 192.168.25.2, 00:00:01, Serial0/2/0
> O 192.168.24.0/24 [110/65] via 192.168.45.4, 00:31:14, Serial0/0/0
> [110/65] via 192.168.25.2, 00:26:27, Serial0/2/0
>
> How's that for fun? [ and trust me, this is just the beginning of it all
> :-) ]
>
> --
> 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, May 31, 2011 at 12:18, Joe Astorino <joeastorino1982_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Now you are just being a tease ;) I will be labbing this today if I get
> time!
> >
> >
> > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Joe Astorino
> > CCIE #24347
> >
> > "He not busy being born is busy dying" - Dylan
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Marko Milivojevic <markom_at_ipexpert.com>
> > Sender: nobody_at_groupstudy.com
> > Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 12:05:47
> > To: Scott Morris<swm_at_emanon.com>
> > Reply-To: Marko Milivojevic <markom_at_ipexpert.com>
> > Cc: <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
> > Subject: Re: OSPF quiz
> >
> > Oh B ... and what I found just blew me away, I must admit. I haven't
> > had so much fun rediscovering something in a long time.
> >
> > Carlos - THANK YOU for the entertainment this morning! :-)
> >
> > --
> > 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, May 31, 2011 at 11:48, Scott Morris <swm_at_emanon.com> wrote:
> >> You went all "What if..." and had to lab it up, didn't you? B B ;)
> >> That's so CCIE.... B heheheheh
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> *Scott Morris*, CCIE/x4/ (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
> >>
> >> CCDE #2009::D, JNCIE-M #153, JNCIE-ER #102, CISSP, et al.
> >>
> >> CCSI #21903, JNCI-M, JNCI-ER
> >>
> >> swm_at_emanon.com
> >>
> >>
> >> Knowledge is power.
> >>
> >> Power corrupts.
> >>
> >> Study hard and be Eeeeviiiil......
> >>
> >>
> >> On 5/31/11 2:43 PM, Marko Milivojevic wrote:
> >>> I concur and I cheated and have the lab proof of it all ;-)
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> 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, May 31, 2011 at 11:37, Joe Astorino <joeastorino1982_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>> Agreed.B B Unless there is something I am missing, the E1 route from
> B1 would
> >>>> be the preferred route and only OSPF route in the routing table on the
> >>>> branch router. The Q stated that B1 redistributed in with a metric of
> 20 and
> >>>> B2 redistributed in with a metric of 50.B B Unless there is some "ip
> ospf
> >>>> cost" happening on the inbound links of the branch router, that should
> be
> >>>> the answer at first glance
> >>>
> >>> 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > 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 May 31 2011 - 22:56:37 ART