Re: OSPF Problem

I've used to think of sham links as virtual area X tunnels.
They do make sense when X is not 0, so they kind of work like
a non area 0 VL.

But... you are in for a surprise if your area 0 is not connected to
your PEs. Lab it up, I guess there's no easy way to learn this.
By default, PEs will not use other PEs IA info, so even though the
information will traverse the sham link, the routing bit will be cleared
and the traffic will not cross the MPLS backbone.

There's a thread on this a while back when I "discovered" this the hard
way (Re: OSPF in MPLS vpn). There's a workarround though.

-Carlos

-Hammer- @ 5/7/2011 13:17 -0300 dixit:
> Thank you for a much clearer explanation. Duh. "Adjacency" is a much
> better and more accurate word.
>
> -Hammer-
>
> "I was a normal American nerd"
> -Jack Herer
>
>
>
> On 07/05/2011 10:58 AM, Brian McGahan wrote:
>> Brian McGahan, CCIE
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Carlos G Mendioroz  <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar>  LW7 EQI  Argentina
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net