Re: discontiguous area problem

If I understand your topology right, you are saying R1/R3, R2/R4 and R7/R8
links do NOT run OSPF on them correct? So you have static routes on R1 and
R2 pointing to R4's loopback address and you are redistributing those into
OSPF 100? I think you need to fundamentally look at your connection issue
with not being able to ping R4 before you worry about other things here.

For R8 to build the tunnel to R4 it will have to have a route to R4
obviously. The only way R8 can get to R4 is by eventually going through
R2. If R2 does not have reachability to R4's loopback and that is your GRE
termination point that is a big problem.

On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 4:42 AM, Joe Astorino <joeastorino1982_at_gmail.com>wrote:

> Are there OSPF adjacencies between R1/R3, R2/R4 and R7/R8 in process ID
> 100 or is it purely static routing? Do R1 and R2 have a route to R4's
> loopback? Does your R4/R8 GRE tunnel come up? Do you have an OSPF
> adjacency on the tunnel in OSPF process ID 11 in area 0?
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 3:19 AM, Mark Matters <markccie_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I meant process ID 100 is dept A and process ID 11 is dept B.
>>
>> Every interface is in area 0. I have 3 discontiguous area 0's, Dept B
>> <---> Dept A <----> Dept B I want Dept B to talk to each other.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Joe Astorino <joeastorino1982_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> A clear list or diagram showing exactly what area and OSPF process every
>>> interface participating in OSPF is in would be helpful here. I am not
>>> quite clear on how R1, R2 and R7 are linked via area 100 but are also "all
>>> in area 0". Also you reference dept. B as OSPF area 11 but then say the
>>> routers in department B are running OSPF process ID 11 ... AND they are
>>> "all in area 0". A very clear diagram would be useful.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Mark Matters <markccie_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> There are static routes between R1 and R3, R2 and R4 and R7 and R8.
>>>> Keeping
>>>> OSPF area 100 (dept A) and OSPF area 11 (dept B) separated.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> R1, R2, R7 are in department A and have connections to each other via
>>>> OSPF
>>>> area 100 in the 10.x.x.x/20 subnet. All routers are in area 0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> R3, R4, R5, R6, R7, R9 and R10 are in department B and running ospf 11
>>>> are
>>>> in the 172.16.x.x/20 subnet. All routers are in area 0.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> R1 --- R3 --- R5 ---R6
>>>> |
>>>> | | | |
>>>> R2 --- R4 -----------
>>>> |
>>>> |
>>>> |
>>>> R7 ---- R8 --- R9 --- R10
>>>> |------------------|
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am not able to ping R1 to R4 and R2 to R4's loopbacks even through I
>>>> have
>>>> static routes between r1/r3 and r2/r4 and I am redistributing the static
>>>> routes on both r1 and r2.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> R3, R4 and R8 and originating default routes via default information
>>>> originate always metric type 1, R4 has metric 60 added to make it the
>>>> primary path but it doesn't seem to do anything.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have 3 area 0's. One in dept A and two in dept B. I want to join only
>>>> the
>>>> two in Dept B via a GRE tunnel between R4 and R8 but I am not getting
>>>> any
>>>> OSPF routes on either side of the tunnel.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Joe Astorino
>>> CCIE #24347
>>> Blog: http://astorinonetworks.com
>>>
>>> "He not busy being born is busy dying" - Dylan
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Joe Astorino
> CCIE #24347
> Blog: http://astorinonetworks.com
>
> "He not busy being born is busy dying" - Dylan
>
>

-- 
Regards,
Joe Astorino
CCIE #24347
Blog: http://astorinonetworks.com
"He not busy being born is busy dying" - Dylan
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net