Those values came from Caslow. I don't have mine at hand right now, so can't give you the exact page number. I believe it is under the Redistribution section though. I will try and locate my Caslow, and email you the page number.
CM ----- Original Message ----- From: Kane, Christopher A. To: 'Charles Manafa' ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 10:59 PM Subject: RE: default-metric 64 vs 2.....why?? [7:33231] I thought redistribution into any other protocol besides OSPF would have a metric of 0. 0 is not understood by EIGRP, IGRP or RIP and therefore won't work. Redistribution into OSPF always assumes 20 unless you specify otherwise. Charles, could you site your source? I'm concerned that I may not understand redistribution as well as I thought if your numbers are right and mine are wrong. Are you giving the "unreachable" numbers because the redistribution won't work or do you have something that specifically states those numbers (16 and -1)? Thanks, Chris -----Original Message----- From: Charles Manafa [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 4:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: default-metric 64 vs 2.....why?? [7:33231] When metric is not supplied, and there is no default metric, then routes redistributed into RIP will have a metric of 16 (unreachable), routes redistributed into IGRP will have a metric of -1 (unreachable), and routes redistributed into OSPF will have a metric of 20. CM ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lupi, Guy" To: Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 7:50 PM Subject: RE: default-metric 64 vs 2.....why?? [7:33231] > It was a little confusing to me also while reading the new practical studies > book, he does state that without a default metric or metric specified in the > redistribution statement the redistribution won't work, and while this is > true with most protocols, I have never had to specify one, default or > otherwise with OSPF. I would be interested to see if anyone has an > explanation for this, is it something due to link state versus distance > vector? I haven't done much ISIS, I would be curious to see if you need to > specify a metric for that, since you don't with OSPF. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Vincent Miller [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 2:18 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: default-metric 64 vs 2.....why?? [7:33231] > > > Remember, the metric on ospf is cost, the metric on rip is hops. > You always need a seed metric when redistributing, I can't explain why the > ospf continues to run, but thats what rip wo't work. Its the same with > EigrpIGRP, no metric, no work. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=33278&t=33231 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
