Not that its at all helpful in this situation, but ip classless, much like bgp
synchronization, fall into the category of commands that simply defy understanding
when presented with test criteria. One must keep in mind that these are
implementations of code that sometimes are not 100% reflective of what the designer
intended. On the other hand, just when you think the code is flawed, you find out
that you truly misunderstood the feature in the first place :)
The end result is generally frustration or increased understanding, or sometimes both
in that order.
Pete
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 3/25/2001 at 10:38 AM John Neiberger wrote:
>I'm not sure how that helps in this case. In both scenarios, whether
>using
>RIP or OSPF, the default route is being learned dynamically by the hub
>router and it is installed into the routing table. The problem is that
>with
>no ip classless configured, that router should never use the default route
>when trying to reach unknown subnets of 10.x.x.x. When running RIP, it
>behaves as expected. When running OSPF, it behaves as if ip classless were
>configured.
>
>Any other thoughts?
>
>Thanks
>John
>
><<On Sun, 25 Mar 2001 10:11:40 -0800 (PST), Mike McCline wrote:
>
>John
>Take a look at the Cisco link below, for a sanity
>check.http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios113ed/113ed_cr/np1_c/1cindep.htm#37279
>
>-Mike>>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________________
>Send a cool gift with your E-Card
>http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/
>
>
>_________________________________
>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]
