Re: A query on OSPF

The issue with the spoke being dr/bdr is it's not efficient. The risk is if you lost the links. In you 3 router setup it would not matter but would still be best practice (and you would likely loose points if you didn't make the hub the dr and I'd even make the spokes priority of 0 for good measure)

Stephen Robinson
Srobinson_at_qtzl.com

On Sep 22, 2011, at 10:38 AM, Amit Kumar Lohumi <getakl_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> For an OSPF area0 over a classic 3-router, Frame-Relay Hub 'n Spoke network,
> with the Hub router using the default network type of Non-broadcast and
> having neighbor statements for both the spokes, is it at all necessary for
> the Hub router to be a DR for achieving full connectivity within the area ?
>
> It doesn't seem to be the case for the Lab i'm working on, 'coz here with
> the default priority settings, the hub router does not become the DR, but
> still there is full connectivity inside area 0.
>
> I think this is because the rule that routes are to be exchanged only
> between the DR and DRothers .... and not directly amongst the DRothers ...
> is true only for Broadcast networks and not NBMA networks.
>
> Can the experts kindly attest to .... or elaborate on this ?
>
> I got my doubts because the INE solutions book mentions that the Hub needs
> to be a DR mandatorily.
>
> Note : Here we assume frame-relay spoke -to -spoke mappings 'coz without
> them, there wouldn't be any connectivity either way.
>
>
> 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 Sep 22 2011 - 12:15:01 ART