"In my setup I saw that so long as I had the 200.0.0.4 address on the R4 loopback that the 200.0.0.0/24 refused to propagate. it did not show up in the R4 table. " it has to be in your R4 routing table as a directly connected subnet. I suppose what you mean is that it doesn't show up as either a ospf or rip dynamic route. every router should send an update that its in their routing table, but because of administrative distances, the directly connected one always wins with a 0 distance. if he's getting something dynamically sent, I'd say he either didn't put the address/mask correctly on r4 or he changed administrative distances.
scott ""The Long and Winding Road"" wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cisco Nuts sent me this one off line. > > R3---------------R4---------------R5 > OSPF RIP > > R4 redistributes RIP to OSPF and visa versa > > > each router has a loopback with an address of 200.0.0.X / 32, where X is the > router number > > RIP version 1 on R4 and R5. The loopback on R4 is in the OSPF domain, and > the loopback on R5 is in the RIP domain. > > CN apparently did not see the same phenomenon that I did. In his setup, he > saw the summary-address of 200.0.0.0/24 propagated onto R4. > > In my setup I saw that so long as I had the 200.0.0.4 address on the R4 > loopback that the 200.0.0.0/24 refused to propagate. it did not show up in > the R4 table. > > damn, I forgot to ask his IOS version. I'm running 12.1.5T10 > > solution? has to do with the various ways one can trick RIP into behaving as > VLSM capable. > > > -- > TANSTAAFL > "there ain't no such thing as a free lunch" Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=64388&t=64388 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
