Re: Loopback0 with Mask of 255.255.255.255 ?? [7:16796]

2001-08-22 Thread Circusnuts

A 32 bit masks is a great way to use the useless for loopbacks.  It's been a
few months since I've worked with an OSPF network, but I believe this is or
was the default value regardless (can't remember the version I was working
in @ the time)...

All the Best !!!
Phil

- Original Message -
From: "YY" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 12:39 PM
Subject: RE: Loopback0 with Mask of 255.255.255.255 ?? [7:16796]


> Loopback is always advertised as 32bit host route no matter what mask you
> assign to it.
> To advertise it as a subnet route, use "ip ospf network point-to-point"
> under int loop0
>
> Cheers,
> YY
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Edmondson, Dorothy M
> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 9:03 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Loopback0 with Mask of 255.255.255.255 ?? [7:16796]
>
>
> Is there a preferred addressing scheme for loopback address when
> implementing OSPF?
> Recently, I read in "Cisco Routers for IP Routing, Little Black Book"
using
> 10.0.0.2/32?  What is your experience using 32 bit mask?
>
> Thank you.
> Dorothy
>
>
> Dorothy Edmondson, CCNP +Voice Access, CCNA, CCDA, CCSI
> WCS , FIS Quality Practices
>
> *Mail: NCR Corporation
> 1529 Brown St. EMD-4
> Dayton, OH  45479
> > * E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> *Office: Voice:  937  445-4133 VP 622-4133




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=16915&t=16796
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: Loopback0 with Mask of 255.255.255.255 ?? [7:16796]

2001-08-22 Thread YY

Loopback is always advertised as 32bit host route no matter what mask you
assign to it.
To advertise it as a subnet route, use "ip ospf network point-to-point"
under int loop0

Cheers,
YY


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Edmondson, Dorothy M
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 9:03 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Loopback0 with Mask of 255.255.255.255 ?? [7:16796]


Is there a preferred addressing scheme for loopback address when
implementing OSPF?
Recently, I read in "Cisco Routers for IP Routing, Little Black Book" using
10.0.0.2/32?  What is your experience using 32 bit mask?

Thank you.
Dorothy


Dorothy Edmondson, CCNP +Voice Access, CCNA, CCDA, CCSI
WCS , FIS Quality Practices 

*Mail:  NCR Corporation
1529 Brown St. EMD-4
Dayton, OH  45479
> * E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Office:Voice:  937  445-4133 VP 622-4133




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=16837&t=16796
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Loopback0 with Mask of 255.255.255.255 ?? [7:16796]

2001-08-22 Thread Peter Van Oene

Assigning recognizable addresses with /32 masks would be considered best
practises in my opinion.  Ideally, these are publicly routable in the SP
space.



*** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***

On 8/22/2001 at 9:02 AM Edmondson, Dorothy M wrote:

>Is there a preferred addressing scheme for loopback address when
>implementing OSPF?
>Recently, I read in "Cisco Routers for IP Routing, Little Black Book" using
>10.0.0.2/32?  What is your experience using 32 bit mask?
>
>Thank you.
>Dorothy
>
>
>Dorothy Edmondson, CCNP +Voice Access, CCNA, CCDA, CCSI
>WCS , FIS Quality Practices 
>
>*Mail: NCR Corporation
>   1529 Brown St. EMD-4
>   Dayton, OH  45479
>> * E-Mail:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>*Office:   Voice:  937  445-4133 VP 622-4133




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=16805&t=16796
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]



RE: Loopback0 with Mask of 255.255.255.255 ?? [7:16796]

2001-08-22 Thread Juliano Moises da Luz

We use valid addresses as loopback in OSPF, so we assigned an entire class C
to loopbackaddresses on routers.  

it works fine.


-Original Message-
From: Edmondson, Dorothy M [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: quarta-feira, 22 de agosto de 2001 10:03
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Loopback0 with Mask of 255.255.255.255 ?? [7:16796]


Is there a preferred addressing scheme for loopback address when
implementing OSPF?
Recently, I read in "Cisco Routers for IP Routing, Little Black Book" using
10.0.0.2/32?  What is your experience using 32 bit mask?

Thank you.
Dorothy


Dorothy Edmondson, CCNP +Voice Access, CCNA, CCDA, CCSI
WCS , FIS Quality Practices 

*Mail:  NCR Corporation
1529 Brown St. EMD-4
Dayton, OH  45479
> * E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*Office:Voice:  937  445-4133 VP 622-4133




Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=16798&t=16796
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]