Re: OSPF Stud areas [7:34375]
Cisco Press, Building Scalable Cisco Networks, page 182, - Totally stubby area - This is an area .. Totally stubby areas are Cisco propriety. cheekin - Original Message - From: "nrf" To: Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2002 3:35 PM Subject: Re: OSPF Stud areas [7:34375] > I don't know where the hell this myth got started that only Cisco can do > totally-stubby areas. Must be one of those stupid study guides out there. > In actual fact, most vendors now offer totally-stubby areas. > > > > ""s vermill"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > All routers must agree on stub status. But a standard stub area only > > filters external routes. All other inter-area routes still make it in. I > > believe that totally stubby areas are a Cisco proprietary implementation. > > However, only the ABR attaching to area 0 needs the 'area stub no-summary' > > command. All others just need the 'area stub' command. So you might get > > away with a totally stubby area even though you aren't purely Cisco. > > Incidentally, I have no idea who is implementing those "stud areas" but it > > sure sounds interesting. > > > > Debbie Westall wrote: > > > > > > Greetings, > > > > > > I have the following scenario: > > > > > > area 0 (backbone) > > > | > > > | > > > | > > > area 20 (stub network) (these are RiverStone MLSs) > > > | > > > | > > > uBR routers (static routing) > > > > > > I would like to set up OSPF between the Riverstones and the > > > Cisco uBRs. We thought to set up the uBRs as stub networks > > > also, but we are seeing the full OSPF routing table on the uBRs > > > (which are already running high utilization). We would only > > > like to see the default route on the uBRs. So would we need to > > > set these up as NSSA or Totally stubby? Or should we create a > > > "new" area and make that a stub of the existing area 20? We > > > have experimented with filtering and we are able to filter out > > > everything but the default, but I don't think we should have to > > > do that either. > > > > > > Right now our lab equipment is in the process of being moved to > > > our new building so I can't program this up right now to test. > > > > > > Thanks for the assist!!! > > > > > > Debbie Westall Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=34738&t=34375 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OSPF Stud areas [7:34375]
I don't know where the hell this myth got started that only Cisco can do totally-stubby areas. Must be one of those stupid study guides out there. In actual fact, most vendors now offer totally-stubby areas. ""s vermill"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > All routers must agree on stub status. But a standard stub area only > filters external routes. All other inter-area routes still make it in. I > believe that totally stubby areas are a Cisco proprietary implementation. > However, only the ABR attaching to area 0 needs the 'area stub no-summary' > command. All others just need the 'area stub' command. So you might get > away with a totally stubby area even though you aren't purely Cisco. > Incidentally, I have no idea who is implementing those "stud areas" but it > sure sounds interesting. > > Debbie Westall wrote: > > > > Greetings, > > > > I have the following scenario: > > > > area 0 (backbone) > > | > > | > > | > > area 20 (stub network) (these are RiverStone MLSs) > > | > > | > > uBR routers (static routing) > > > > I would like to set up OSPF between the Riverstones and the > > Cisco uBRs. We thought to set up the uBRs as stub networks > > also, but we are seeing the full OSPF routing table on the uBRs > > (which are already running high utilization). We would only > > like to see the default route on the uBRs. So would we need to > > set these up as NSSA or Totally stubby? Or should we create a > > "new" area and make that a stub of the existing area 20? We > > have experimented with filtering and we are able to filter out > > everything but the default, but I don't think we should have to > > do that either. > > > > Right now our lab equipment is in the process of being moved to > > our new building so I can't program this up right now to test. > > > > Thanks for the assist!!! > > > > Debbie Westall Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=34735&t=34375 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: OSPF Stud areas [7:34375]
All routers must agree on stub status. But a standard stub area only filters external routes. All other inter-area routes still make it in. I believe that totally stubby areas are a Cisco proprietary implementation. However, only the ABR attaching to area 0 needs the 'area stub no-summary' command. All others just need the 'area stub' command. So you might get away with a totally stubby area even though you aren't purely Cisco. Incidentally, I have no idea who is implementing those "stud areas" but it sure sounds interesting. Debbie Westall wrote: > > Greetings, > > I have the following scenario: > > area 0 (backbone) > | > | > | > area 20 (stub network) (these are RiverStone MLSs) > | > | > uBR routers (static routing) > > I would like to set up OSPF between the Riverstones and the > Cisco uBRs. We thought to set up the uBRs as stub networks > also, but we are seeing the full OSPF routing table on the uBRs > (which are already running high utilization). We would only > like to see the default route on the uBRs. So would we need to > set these up as NSSA or Totally stubby? Or should we create a > "new" area and make that a stub of the existing area 20? We > have experimented with filtering and we are able to filter out > everything but the default, but I don't think we should have to > do that either. > > Right now our lab equipment is in the process of being moved to > our new building so I can't program this up right now to test. > > Thanks for the assist!!! > > Debbie Westall > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=34412&t=34375 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
