Okay, I'm going to throw out a SWAG here, but it might violate the rules
of the scenario.
On routerE use two different OSPF processes. In process 1, add the
network statement for the D-E link. In process 2, add the network
statement for the C-E link. Do not add a network statement for the two
networks on the ethernet interface.
If you have a recent IOS version on E, use two separate eigrp
processes, one for each network on the ethernet interface, which
requires the ability to add a mask in the network statement.
Assuming 144.226.10.0 is in eigrp 1, redistribute eigrp 1 to the
appropriate ospf process and filter out 144.226.20.0. Redistribute
eigrp 2 to the other ospf process and filter out 144.226.10.0.
To be honest, I have NO idea if that will even work. It's still pretty
early and I didn't really think about it too much. It's a bummer that I
don't have five routers lying around or I'd set this up too.
John
>>> "Kevin Wigle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 3/23/01 8:25:39 AM >>>
Dear Group,
I have an interesting scenario I'm trying to mock up in the lab and
getting
nowhere fast.
I'm not good at ascii art so I'll try to describe the setup.
Imagine a core network with 4 routers, put them in a square, from the
top
left clockwise, routerA, routerB, routerC, routerD.
These routers are connected in a full mesh and OSPF is configured.
Each router of course is in Area 0 but each router also has another
area.
routerA - 1005
routerB - 1010
routerC - 1015
routerD - 1020
There is a fifth router at the bottom - routerE, connecting to routerC
and
routerD with equal cost circuits using point-to-point addresses.
These transit routes are configured into OSPF, each network into the
same
area as the core router where it terminates.
On a third ( Ethernet ) interface on routerE there are two networks,
one as
primary and one as secondary. Let's use: primary 142.226.10.0 and
secondary:
142.226.20.0
Policy routing has been configured to allow the prime network out the
routerE-routerD circuit and the secondary network has been configured
to go
out the routerE-routerC circuit.
EIGRP has been configured for the networks on the inside of routerE and
is
redistributed into OSPF with no auto-summary.
Now, when on either routerA or routerB, the inside routes are in the
routing
table as available through both routers.
Objective.
Have 142.226.10.0 only advertised out routerE-routerD
and 142.226.20.0 only advertised out routerE-routerC
Discussion.
I have been reading madly about distribute lists and route-maps. It
all
reads so simply but I think this particular situation is interesting
because
of the two networks on one interface.
OSPF cannot use a distribute list and use the interface command (would
have
been perfect).
OSPF cannot filter incoming updates (which would have been great on
routerC
and routerD).
On the face of it this "seems" so simple - but - I'm stuck.
Any ideas welcome.
tia
Kevin Wigle
Using access-lists on the egress ports don't seem to do it either.
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
