In a message dated 10/19/00 4:33:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Hi All,
>
> There are 3 contiguous networks:
> 172.16.1.0/24
> 172.16.2.0/24
> 172.16.3.0/24
> What is the supernet ?
> Is it 172.16.1.0/22 ? Would you pls explain to me ?
>
> TIA,
>
That is not the su
00
|10.
172.16.3.0 in bin-->10110110.0001.00
|10.
|
Thanks
Thangavel
- Original Message -
|
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 3:57 AM
Subjec
D]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Summarization
In a message dated 10/19/00 4:33:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Hi All,
>
> There are 3 contiguous networks:
> 172.16.1.0/24
> 172.16.2.0/24
> 172.16.3.0/24
> What is the supernet ?
> Is it
In a message dated 10/19/00 5:53:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I feel the summarized supernet route should be 172.16.1.0/22
>
> from the below fig ..its clear that the no of common bits in the MSB part is
> 22
>
It can't be 172.16.1.0/22 because the address of 172.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 5:11 AM
Subject: Re: Summarization
> In a message dated 10/19/00 5:53:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
gt;; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 10:22 PM
Subject: Re: Summarization
> I feel the summarized supernet route should be 172.16.1.0/22
>
> from the below fig ..its clear that the no of common bits in the MSB part
is
&
I beleive Geoff is right.
Thanks
Thangavel
- Original Message -
From: A. Geoffrey Cauchi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: thangs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 5:39
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 10:22 PM
> Subject: Re: Summarization
>
>
> > I feel the summarized supernet route should be 172.16.1.0/22
> >
> > from the bel
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "A. Geoffrey Cauchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "thangs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Re: Summarization
>Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:39:20
tet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 10:32 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Summarization
>
>
> Ok, I am joining in a little late since the answer to the question is
> complete. I was wondering Geoff why are you stating " but since t
but does not include the first subnet. Geoff's answer
> covers only the stated subnets.
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Daniel Boutet [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 10:32 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject
ce
Duck
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 3:11 AM
Subject: Re: Summarization
> In a message dated 10/19/00 5:53:17 AM Eastern
Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:> >
&g
126.213.64.0 = 0100 .0
126.213.95.0 = 0111 .0
subnet
mask = 1100 .0 = ?
do you
see it? the summarization boundary occurs at the last point to the left where
all bits in both rows are the same. in your example, that is at the point
between the 64 and the 32 position. or at th
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, archstein wrote:
>
> Hi groups...
>
> Can you help me please ? What is summary address for subnet 128.213.64.0 -
>128.213.95.0 ?
128.213.64.0/27 would summarize that range.
> Is that right if the summary address is 128.213.64.0 255.255.192.0
thats 128.213.64.0/26, and
I
think the subnet mask should be 255.255.224.0
126.213.64.0 = 0100
128.213.95.0 = 0101
subnetmask = 1110 = 224
raymond.
-Original Message-From: Chuck Larrieu
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: 14 Nopember 2000
13:11To: archstein; [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE
before the flames start, let me correct myself :)
On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, Brian wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, archstein wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi groups...
> >
> > Can you help me please ? What is summary address for subnet 128.213.64.0 -
>128.213.95.0 ?
>
> 128.213.64.0/27 would summarize that r
Te summary route would be 128.213.64.0 255.255.224.0
64: 010 0
95: 010 1
-
224: 111 0
ALI SHEERAZ
>From: "archstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "archstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Summarization
>Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 11:27:56 +0700
Hi
128.213.64.0 - 128.213.95.0 => 32 /24 ip
addresses
the mask you supplied 255.255.192.0 includes 64 /24 ip
addresses.
So, the right mask is 255.255.224.0
Note that you should have ip classless specified on your
router.
Hope the explanation helps.
Geoff
- Original Messag
I recommend this web site that was advertised on the list recently (Hitesh
Pathak) as an outstanding document to read on all things IP. Even route
aggregation/summarisation.
HYPERLINK http://www.3com.com/nsc/501302.html
http://www.3com.com/nsc/501302.html
Dan Mansfield
MCSE, CNE, CLP soon to b
try this
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/idg4/nd2003.htm
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/103/eigrp5.html
http://www.cisco.com/cpress/cc/td/cpress/design/ospf/on0407.htm
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/ip_c
/ipcprt2/1cdrip.htm
Oz
http://www
Daniel,
My Doyle book is at home (I know, I should carry it with me at all
times), but...I think the answer /23 is correct. If you consider your
chart below, the first 7 bits (0001 000) are the same, not just the first
4. Add those 7 to the previous 16 bits from the first two octets and y
I've done it with about 100 interfaces on 7513's and didn't see this
problem. It may be a limitation of the code on the box, memory (as you
indicated), or something else. Have you been able to rule-out as many
"something elses" as possible?
What does the network topology look like? Do you have
Hello Ben, thanks for your detailed answer.
I'm afraid I have no idea what happened but I'm think that it wasn't a
problem with CPU unless summarization is a very intensive cpu process(I
don't know if it is).
We have a hub-and-spoke topology. Four 7500 (2 7513 and 2 7507) for backbone
(ATM)and ov
David,
Another thing that I wonder about is the remote end; what do those routers
look like?
If you have something like this:
+-Hub1---Hub3-+
| \ / |
RemoteX-+ X +-RemoteY
| / \ |
+-Hub2---Hub4-+
You'll probably want to restrict what r
John,
You might want to try using the aggregate-address command and see
what magic happens. As a side note.. IGP's summarize, whereas BGP being an
EGP aggregates.
watch the word wrap..
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fipr
rp_r/bgp_r/1rfbgp1.htm#xt
oopsWhat the heck was I thinking?? That's a sure sign I've
been studying too long today. I know very well the difference
between summary-address and aggregate-address and I still was
using the wrong command! Good grief...
And even while I was typing my first post I had this nagging
fee
Just for grins, I tried to find out what summary-address does
under BGP in 11.2 but I wasn't able to find a reference for
it. The 11.2 Command Reference says that command is only for
OSPF and IS-IS, which is what I expected.
Still, it's interesting that the router let me make this
particul
27 matches
Mail list logo
