Getting way off topic ... Transit interface (more than one router) => Type 2 LSA Stub interface (no OSPF neighbors) => stub network within Type 1 LSA Ivan http://www.ioshints.info/about http://blog.ioshints.info/
_____ From: Manu Chao [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 3:52 PM To: Ivan Pepelnjak Cc: Roman A. Nozdrin; Lukas Garberg; [email protected] Subject: Re: [c-nsp] passive-interface on VRF-specific OSPF process type-2 ;) On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Ivan Pepelnjak <[email protected]> wrote: > > while configuring an OSPF process for a VRF on a Cisco 3550-12G > > (running 12.2(25)SE) I notice that the command "passive-interface" > > is unavailable. How can this be? Is there another way I can > suppress > > routing updates on an interface? > > You can put actual network commands in ospf configuration section. For > example: > > network 172.16.8.1 0.0.0.0 > network 172.17.0.30 0.0.0.0 > network 172.17.0.242 0.0.0.0 > > It will activate interfaces in the target VRF only. You can > redistribute > any other routes you need to announce. ... And we're back to the neverending question: ignoring the obvious implications for stub areas, is it better to advertise connected subnets as parts of router (type-1) LSA or as individual external (type-5) routes? Any thoughts or preferences? Ivan http://www.ioshints.info/about http://blog.ioshints.info/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
