RE: EIGRP-OSPF Redistribution doesn't reflect the correct next

Apologies for missing that Joe. Thanks guys. Appreciate the explanations.

Regards,
Sid
Nobody's really listening, until you make a mistake...

-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Astorino [mailto:joeastorino1982_at_gmail.com]
Sent: 27 April 2012 19:02
To: Sidney D'Souza
Cc: Marko Milivojevic; Cisco certification
Subject: Re: EIGRP-OSPF Redistribution doesn't reflect the correct next hop

Read my post carefully...It answers your question.

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Sidney D'Souza <mail.sidney_at_gmail.com>
wrote:
> That was interesting. It changed the next hop to the 10.1.1.1 after
> making the interface p2p. What changed in the way ospf works other
> than timers and no dr/bdr elections?
>
> Regards,
> Sid
> Nobody's really listening, until you make a mistake...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marko Milivojevic [mailto:markom_at_ipexpert.com]
> Sent: 26 April 2012 19:35
> To: Sidney D'Souza
> Cc: Joe Astorino; Cisco certification
> Subject: Re: EIGRP-OSPF Redistribution doesn't reflect the correct
> next hop
>
> In that case, FA will be the next-hop of the original route. Change
> interface to p2p for entertainment ;-)
>
> --
> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427
>
> :: This message was sent from a mobile device. I apologize for errors
> and brevity. ::
>
> On Apr 26, 2012, at 6:51, "Sidney D'Souza" <mail.sidney_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes. The redistributing router has eigrp and ospf running on the same
>> interface.
>>
>> Here is the link to the topology
>>
>> http://i.imgur.com/zncWW.jpg
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Sid
>> Nobody's really listening, until you make a mistake...
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Joe Astorino [mailto:joeastorino1982_at_gmail.com]
>> Sent: 26 April 2012 17:28
>> To: Sidney D'Souza
>> Cc: Cisco certification
>> Subject: Re: EIGRP-OSPF Redistribution doesn't reflect the correct
>> next hop
>>
>> Like the other guys on the thread said, you likely have some issue
>> with the OSPF forwarding address getting set to a non-zero value
>> during redistribution. This can happen generally if your
>> redistributing router has OSPF configured to run on the interface
>> facing towards your redistribution point (in your case, the interface
>> in the EIGRP domain would have been configured for OSPF). There are
>> very specific requirements to make the forwarding address a non-zero
>> value though. Go through this list and see if it rings true for you:
>> Note that ALL of these must be true.
>>
>> These conditions set the forwarding address field to a non-zero address:
>>
>> - OSPF is enabled on the ASBR's next hop interface AND
>> - ASBR's next hop interface is non-passive under OSPF AND
>> - ASBR's next hop interface is not point-to-point AND
>> - ASBR's next hop interface is not point-to-multipoint AND
>> - ASBR's next hop interface address falls under the network range
>> specified in the router ospf command.
>>
>> These rules I have references from the following documentation:
>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a008
>> 0
>> 09405a
>> .shtml
>> You can read more about the rules in the official rfc for OSPFv2 as
>> well
>>
>> HTH
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>>
>> Joe Astorino
>> CCIE #24347
>> http://astorinonetworks.com
>>
>> "He not busy being born is busy dying" - Dylan
>>
>>
>> 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
http://astorinonetworks.com
"He not busy being born is busy dying" - Dylan
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net