Hello Ben, thanks for your detailed answer. 
I'm afraid I have no idea what happened but I'm think that it wasn't a
problem with CPU unless summarization is a very intensive cpu process(I
don't know if it is).
We have a hub-and-spoke topology. Four 7500 (2 7513 and 2 7507) for backbone
(ATM)and over 230 sites (2500 an 2600 mainly), and we have implemented
redundancy using dialers and ISDN connections (and yes, we have conected
each router to two different hub routers). In one of the 7513 we have over
100 dialers and 90 serial WANs connections, I have tried the summarization
again with only two routers and by now, I haven't experimented any problem.
 As you can guess, our network is growing more and more and I'm worried
about routing tables with a lot of entries (we're using network 172.x.x.x
for serial interfaces and 10.x.x.x for ethernet interfaces)
I tried to summarize on networks 10.x.x.x and 172.x.x.x using the following
commands
ip summary-address eigrp 1 10.0.0.0 255.0.0.0
ip summary-address eigrp 1 172.0.0.0 255.0.0.0
Today, I have talked with my boss and we've decided to try the summarization
again but we're going to use the 0.0.0.0 network instead the other two (I'll
try to check my RSP in-depth this time)
Anyway, we're not experts in Cisco so I thought that we could reduce routing
tables using summary address and make easier the administration and
troubleshooting (perhaps it isn't a good idea). Unfortunatly, we work in a
helth-care enviroment, and we have to make sure before doing anything in
backbone routers.
I hope you read this post, I live in Europe and every time I have to reply a
post I have hundreds before me. Anyway, I'll keep you and this wonderful
group informed.

David




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=31888&t=31766
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to