WOOPS. Due to me being a jackass. I have been looking at your diagram incorrectly. I would think that if OSPF is configured properly, this will already be the case. Can i see your routing tables, please? preferably from all four routers. Peter Slow, CCNP Voice Specialist Network Engineer Planetary Networks 535 West 34th Street New York, NY 10001 Cell: (516) 782.1535 Desk: (646) 792.2395 Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax: (646) 792.2396 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Schwantz" To: Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 11:38 AM Subject: Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076] > Thanks for the recommendations. Firstly, let me explain why I need the > routing to behave in such a way. The reasons are purely geographical and I > want to reduce latency. Routers A and B are in London and connected back to > back via FastEth. Routers C and D are in and SanJose and NewYork > respectively(Connected to both London routers via FR). > I certaintly won't want traffic originating from RouterA ( London ) destined > for RouterD (NewYork) to have to go to SanJose first. It would be much > better if the hop is A-B-D instead of A-C-D. > > Schwantz > > ""EA Louie"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > ... or route-map the router D network(s) to go through Router B at Router > A > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Chris Larson" > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 7:24 AM > > Subject: RE: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076] > > > > > > > Place a summary route to null 0 for the networks on Router D on your > OSPF > > > routers and set the metrics appropriately for the summary route > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > > > Kevin Schwantz > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 10:03 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > 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] > > 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=6258&t=6076 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:6076]
Peter I. Slow, CCNP Voice Specialist Tue, 29 May 2001 10:10:02 -0700
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Kevin Schwantz
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... David Chandler
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... James Haynes
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Kevin Schwantz
- RE: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Hire, Ejay
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... W. Alan Robertson
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Peter I. Slow, CCNP Voice Specialist
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Peter I. Slow, CCNP Voice Specialist
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Peter I. Slow, CCNP Voice Specialist
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Peter I. Slow, CCNP Voice Specialist
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Peter I. Slow, CCNP Voice Specialist
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... W. Alan Robertson
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... W. Alan Robertson
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... David Chandler
- RE: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Kane, Christopher A.
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Stephen Skinner
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Peter I. Slow, CCNP Voice Specialist
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... EA Louie
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... W. Alan Robertson
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Peter Van Oene
- Re: Wanna Be a CCIE? Try This One [7:... Peter Van Oene