Howard C. Berkowitz wrote: > > At 1:18 AM +0000 1/25/03, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: > >I'm afraid your question isn't clear. > > > >By definition, an ASBR connects two unlike networks, one that > is running > >OSPF and one that isn't. > > Moan...connects two unlike routing domain. Both could be > different > OSPF processes.
I know. I thought of that, but how often is that the case? And domain means many other things to many people. I knew you would argue! ;-) Priscilla > > >So, the ASBR will connect to the Internet in your > >example. > > > >Steve Ringley wrote: > >> > >> I have an OSPF network, and I have my Internet > connections. Do > >> I: > >> > >> ASBR where traffic goes from area 0 to the Internet > > > >Is that where your Internet connection is? In area 0? Often, > it is, and > >that's where your ASBR will be. > > > >> > >> or > >> > >> ASBR where traffic goes to an area x then to the Internet? > > > >Goes from where to an Area x and then to the Internet?? This > is where your > >question gets unclear. But if you are considering putting an > ASBR between > >Area x and Area 0, then that doesn't make sense. It's not an > ASBR because > >it's connecting two OSPF networks. If your Internet connection > is in Area X, > >you will have an ASBR that connects the OSPF world to the > Internet, sitting > >on the edge of Area X. > > > Of course, a single router can simultaneously be an ASBR and > ABR. > > > > >Are you asking if the ASBR should be in Area 0? I think the > answer is yes, > >if it can, but sometimes that's simply not possible on large > internetworks > >with multiple egress points. > > > >If I completely missed what you're getting at, sorry! > > > >Priscilla > > Again, the answer is "it depends." Especially when I'm doing a > migration from an older protocol to OSPF, or redistributing > statics, > I will often have an ASBR at the "far edge" of a non-backbone > area. > > One interesting topology was for a Very Large Communications > Company > with a Well-Known Research Lab. Said lab had its own Internet > connectivity (OC-3, IIRC), where corporate had DS-3. The lab > wanted > to hear summarized corporate routes from area 0.0.0.0, but did > NOT > want to hear default from the core, and did not want its area > default > to propagate outside the ara. > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=61870&t=61823 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
