>"Howard C. Berkowitz" wrote:
>>
>> > > The latter is wrong. The order of selection is:
>> >>
>> >> 1. Numerically highest IP addresss on a loopback interface, when
>> >> there are multiple loopback addresses.
>> >>
>> >> 2. IP address on the loopback address when only a single loopback
>> >>is defined.
>> >>
>> >> 3. Numerically highest IP address on an active physical (or
>> >>logical other than
>> >> loopback address)--active as in no shutdown
>> >
>> >I have a strong feeling that p.2 doesn't make any sense.
>>
>> Point 2 should read "on the loopback interface" Is that your concern?
>>
>
>When only a single loopback interface is defined, it's address is the
>highest of available loopback addresses, right?
>
>BTW, p.1 is wrong for ciscos. When multiple IP addresses are defined on
>a loopback interface, OSPF takes only primary address of it and ignores
>the secondaries.
Who said anything about secondary addresses?
The P1 case:
int loop 0
ip addr 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
int loop 1
ip addr 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.0
int loop 2
ip addr 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.0
The router id will be 192.168.3.1
>
>/felis
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
