Peter,
Thanks for your input. I hope my description of the geographical topology in
another post should point out why I want my traffic to route in the manner I
have described. Taking down the link between C and D is not an option. You
mentioned Virtual links. I always thought they were used to link an area to
area 0. I don't see how it can be applied to my case. I can take the easy
way out and place all the routers in area 0 but want to use that action as
my last resort.
kevin
""Peter I. Slow, CCNP Voice Specialist"" wrote in
message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> well, since C and D are in the same area they have the tame topology DB.
> they KNOW the best route to each other and are going to use it.
> the tunnel idea is kinda stupid.
> first let me ask why you would want traffic between two directly connected
> routers to NOT use that link?
>
> ...But anyway, i would suggest policy routing in this case, or if there is
a
> large traffic volume (too much for routers C and D to process switch,
make
> static routes.
>
> other options include putting C and D in their own areas, and making each
a
> stub, and get rid of that link between C and D. that would be the best
> idea...
>
> play with plath costs,
> and you might try a virtual link as well between C and D,
> but break glass only in case of emergency, if you know what i mean =P
>
> -Peter
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kevin Schwantz"
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 10:03 AM
> Subject: Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076]
>
>
> > routerA routerB
> > AREA0--------AREA0
> > | |
> > routerC routerD
> > AREA1---------AREA1
> >
> >
> > Since we are on the topic of OSPF, could someone help me out on the
> scenario
> > above?
> >
> > Routers A and B have interfaces in Area 0 and Area1. I want traffic
from
> > routerA destined for routerD to go via router B. This is not the case in
> my
> > network because I realise that routerA prefers Intra-Area routes and
thus
> > would route traffic to routerD via routerC.
> > What tweaks must I make in order to force the traffic from routerA to
> > routerD to go via routerB ? Someone suggested building a GRE tunnel
> between
> > routerA and routerB and then configure the tunnel to be in AREA1.
> >
> > Any suggestions?
> >
> > Kevin
> >
> >
> > ""W. Alan Robertson"" wrote in message
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Guys,
> > >
> > > The actual traffic will not be routed up to area 0... Area 0 has been
> > > extended
> > > down to R2, so R2 is now a backbone router. R2 has interfaces in 3
> areas
> > > now:
> > > Area1, Area2, and Area0 by means of it's virtual link.
> > >
> > > Any traffic originating in Area2 destined for Area1 will be routed
> > directly
> > > by
> > > R2. This satisfies the "Interarea traffic must traverse the backbone"
> > rule,
> > > because R2 *is* a backbone router.
> > >
> > > This is not theory... It is fact.
> > >
> > > Alan
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Andrew Larkins"
> > > To:
> > > Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 10:13 AM
> > > Subject: RE: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076]
> > >
> > >
> > > > agreed....to area 0 then on to the intended area
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Circusnuts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > > Sent: 28 May 2001 15:50
> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Chuck- my answer is Yes. The traffic from the Virtual Linked
> psuedo-ABR
> > > > passes back to Area 0, before it's sent onto the intended Area (even
> if
> > > it's
> > > > directly connected).
> > > >
> > > > Phil
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Chuck Larrieu
> > > > To:
> > > > Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2001 8:59 PM
> > > > Subject: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Ever wonder what the CCIE candidates talk about on the CCIE list?
> > > > >
> > > > > The following message came through today. I thought the bright
folks
> > on
> > > > this
> > > > > list might be curious, and might want to venture an answer.
> > > > >
> > > > > Begin original question:
> > > > >
> > > > > Guys,
> > > > >
> > > > > I wonder if there is anybody who remembers the discussion on
Virtual
> > > > > Links in OSPF. It was posted some time ago but I can't seem to
find
> > it.
> > > > >
> > > > > The scenario was something like this:
> > > > > ________ _______ _______
> > > > > |Area 0 | |Area1| |Area2|
> > > > > | R0 |--| R1 |--| R2 |
> > > > > |______| |_____| |_____|
> > > > >
> > > > > There is a virtual link from area 2 to Area 0 via Area1. Traffic
> needs
> > to
> > > > > get to R1 in Area 1 from R2 in Area 2. Assume that the virtual
link
> > has
> > > to
> > > > > use R1 (To create the V.Link). Does the traffic flow passed R1 (in
> > Area
> > > 1)
> > > > > to Area 0 and then back to area 1, or does the actual flow just to
> R1
> > > from
> > > > > R2.
> > > > >
> > > > > I cant remember the conclusion, and I cant seem to find it on the
> > > > archives.
> > > > > Quite interesting issues.
> > > > >
> > > > > End of original question
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Chuck
> > > > >
> > > > > One IOS to forward them all.
> > > > > One IOS to find them.
> > > > > One IOS to summarize them all
> > > > > And in the routing table bind them.
> > > > >
> > > > > -JRR Chambers-
> > > > > 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]
> > > > 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]
> > 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]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=6239&t=6076
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
