At 1:44 PM + 12/2/02, Peter van Oene wrote:
>
>A general concept in routing is to always prefer information from the
>most accurate source. In Link State routing, a given router always has
>the most accurate information about the area itself, and thus will
>always prefer information derived fr
On Sun, 2002-12-01 at 12:18, p b wrote:
> Peter van Oene wrote:
> >
> > Non intra-area ASBRs are found via type 4 LSAs (ASBR Summary)
> > which
> > follow the same rules as type 3 summaries and thus prevent non
> > zero
> > areas from providing transit toward ASBRs (that is where the
> > non zero
Peter van Oene wrote:
>
> Non intra-area ASBRs are found via type 4 LSAs (ASBR Summary)
> which
> follow the same rules as type 3 summaries and thus prevent non
> zero
> areas from providing transit toward ASBRs (that is where the
> non zero
> area contains neither the source nor ASBR)
You're rig
On Sat, 2002-11-30 at 12:52, p b wrote:
> Thanks for the comments. Some thoughts below.
>
> Peter van Oene wrote:
> >
> > > Went back and read through some of the relevant parts of
> > > the RFC. I believe there is no routing loop issue if an ABR
> > > was to consider summary LSAs received from
Thanks for the comments. Some thoughts below.
Peter van Oene wrote:
>
> > Went back and read through some of the relevant parts of
> > the RFC. I believe there is no routing loop issue if an ABR
> > was to consider summary LSAs received from non-zero areas.
> > (where "consider" means install
On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 08:04, p b wrote:
> Thanks.
>
> Went back and read through some of the relevant parts of
> the RFC. I believe there is no routing loop issue if an ABR
> was to consider summary LSAs received from non-zero areas.
> (where "consider" means install routes from these type 3s.
Thanks.
Went back and read through some of the relevant parts of
the RFC. I believe there is no routing loop issue if an ABR
was to consider summary LSAs received from non-zero areas.
(where "consider" means install routes from these type 3s.
"consider", above, does not mean propogate the summ
""p b"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Consider this a question around the theory behind why OSPF
> did things a certain way. Somewhere along the way, Moy
> et. al. decided that there was an issue with an ABR processing
> a summary LSA. Based on that, they decid
On Sun, 2002-11-24 at 21:56, p b wrote:
> Consider this a question around the theory behind why OSPF
> did things a certain way. Somewhere along the way, Moy
> et. al. decided that there was an issue with an ABR processing
> a summary LSA. Based on that, they decided to make a design
> decision
> > Consider the following topology:
> >
> > area_0---ABR_1area_1-ABR_2area_0
> >
> > There are two area 0's.
Use a virtual link to connect the area 0s.
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus ^V Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://
Consider this a question around the theory behind why OSPF
did things a certain way. Somewhere along the way, Moy
et. al. decided that there was an issue with an ABR processing
a summary LSA. Based on that, they decided to make a design
decision in OSPF to not allow this behavior.
Apparently th
""p b"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Thanks. But this doesn't really answer my question. I realize
> that area 0 is partitioned. I'm not looking for an answer to
> "is there a rule that prevents this", but instead, "what breaks
> if ABR_1 were to consider rout
Thanks. But this doesn't really answer my question. I realize
that area 0 is partitioned. I'm not looking for an answer to
"is there a rule that prevents this", but instead, "what breaks
if ABR_1 were to consider routes learned via a non-area-0 summary
LSA in its computation of it's routing tabl
> CL: hey, all those guys had multiple identities. He could hit the Lab
> several times under different identities, scope it out, and probably pass
> after just a couple of tries.
Crude and slow, clansman. Your config was no better than that of a clumsy
child.
;-)
Message Posted at:
http://ww
""B.J. Wilson"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > CL: you have a partitioned area 0. can't have two area zeros in ospf. to
> > quote from my favorite movie of all time, "There can be only one"
>
> "I am Connor MacLeod of the Clan MacLeod. I was born in 1518 in
> CL: you have a partitioned area 0. can't have two area zeros in ospf. to
> quote from my favorite movie of all time, "There can be only one"
"I am Connor MacLeod of the Clan MacLeod. I was born in 1518 in the village
of Glenfinnan on the shores of Loch Shiel. And I am a CCIE."
Message
""p b"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Consider the following topology:
>
> area_0---ABR_1area_1-ABR_2area_0
>
> There are two area 0's.
CL: you have a partitioned area 0. can't have two area zeros in ospf. to
quote from my favorite movie of all ti
17 matches
Mail list logo
