Kris Keen wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
I too would look at area stub no-summary, this will only propogate a
default route and will not not allow Type 3 LSA's into your area...
Except, of course, for a type-3 LSA that specifies the default route. In
fact, it
I know how to reduce the number of LSA's being injected into an area by an
ABR by using the stub, no-summary command. However, area 3 LSA's are still
sent into the area (default route LSA). I know I cab stop them with
database filter, but does anyone know of another way to block all LSA's?
You could use 'passive-interface' in the ospf config or you could choose
not to include a network statement that includes that interface. If you
need to advertise that prefix, a possibility might be to redistribute
connected.
Of course, it all depends on what you're really trying to accomplish.
would writing an access list to block 224.0.0.5 and .6 do the trick?
-Original Message-
From: John Neiberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:13 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Blocking OSPF LSA [7:39191]
You could use 'passive-interface' in the ospf
?
-Original Message-
From: John Neiberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:13 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Blocking OSPF LSA [7:39191]
You could use 'passive-interface' in the ospf config or you could choose
not to include a network statement that includes
I too would look at area stub no-summary, this will only propogate a
default route and will not not allow Type 3 LSA's into your area...
Or remove OSPF and just add static routes!
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=39233t=39191
6 matches
Mail list logo
