I would like to apologizes for the "Hell all" in the beginning of my e-mail. I think it was the spell checker that made the change or it could be my typo.
All I meant was Hello all, Suresh On Thu, Jul 3, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Suresh Mishra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hell all, > > In this section R2 is redistributing OSPF into BGP and is advertising > it to R6. At the same time, R2 and R6 are ospf neighbors and are > advertising ospf routes to each other. Now there is a question in > this section that reads as follows. > > "R6 should not receive any routes from R2 that are from the ospf > domain. No network statements are allowed.". > > After reading this question, I used "ip ospf database" filter command > and filtered all the LSA's that were send to R6 from R2 as I was not > allowed to use network statement that would allow me to disable OSPF > on the interface. > > However, P.G uses a solution where it filtered OSPF routes that were > redistributed into BGP. I think this question wants us to not have the > ospf routes propagated to the OSPF neighbors via BGP routes. > > I think this question needs one simple modification. Instead of saying > "any ospf routes" that includes OSPF routes only (as per the English > language understanding), Instead it should say BGP routes. That means > it should read something like this. > > "R6 should not receive any BGP routes from R2 that are from the ospf > domain. No network statements are allowed" > > > I know there will always be a language issue with CCIE. But I think > making something difficult by using a language twist makes it more > confusing than technically challenging. > > > > Thanks > Suresh >
