From: Logan, Harold (loganh@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Apr 08 2002 - 13:33:28 GMT-3
I'll try that later tonight, thanks for the input. I don't think it was caused
by route feedback, because R3 consistently had a routes to 151.100 and 151.101,
and could reach them with no problem. I also tried it summarizing it down to a
class A and got the same effect; I could get R3 to pick it up in ospf, but for
some reason R3 wasn't kicking that network into IGRP. The root of the problem
is that the lab requirements say that R5 has to send one advertisement to R2 fo
r 151.100 and 151.101. That much isn't a problem, but in order for IGRP to deal
with the 151 network, it has to match a classful boundary.
Myself, I'm finding that I really don't care for the labs in Solie's book. I'm
guessing that he probably wasn't involved in the writing of them, since the las
t 50 pages of the book are basically a plug for skylabs. I like his approach to
covering the material, and I like the exercises throughtout the chapters, but
I'm finding the scenarios at the end of the book, and more importantly the lack
of an explanation in the alleged solutions on ciscopress.com, to be a hindranc
e to my learning.
Incidentally, using ip default-network isn't really a permissable solution acco
rding to the rules for the lab in my opinion, since the command puts a static r
oute into the router's config.
Cheers,
Hal
-----Original Message-----
From: ying chang [mailto:ying_c@hotmail.com]
Sent: Mon 4/8/2002 11:23 AM
To: Logan, Harold; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Cc:
Subject: RE: Skynet 151.100.0.0/15 to IGRP/24?
Hi Harold,
That's a creative approach! But is this still meet the requirement the
question asked? Sorry don't have the book with me at this time. If it's
OK,
I think we probably should just summarize them at R5 the way you did it
and
get the same stability as 172.16.x.x/16 network.
I think the problem with intermittently showing up in the IGRP table pr
oblem
probably is caused by the route feedback at R3. 172.16.x.x/16 did not h
ave
problem because it's not redisdistributed from OSPF as 150.x network. P
ut a
filter or adjust admin distance at R3 probably would take care of it. T
o
verify if this is the case, change igrp time to 10 30 30 60 and use "de
bug
ip igrp tran" to see what's going on.
Thanks,
Chang
>From: "Logan, Harold" <loganh@mcc.cc.fl.us>
>To: "ying chang" <ying_c@hotmail.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: RE: Skynet 151.100.0.0/15 to IGRP/24?
>Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 10:27:49 -0400
>
>My approach to it was to do summary-addresses on R2 for 151.100.0.0/16
and
>151.101.0.0/16. That got them to show up in R3's routing table, but th
ey
>only got advertised into IGRP intermittently. What was perplexing was
that
>the 172.16 network from R5 got injected into IGPR with no problem.
>
>Anyone else get that one to work?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ying chang [mailto:ying_c@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Sun 4/7/2002 1:52 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Cc:
> Subject: Skynet 151.100.0.0/15 to IGRP/24?
>
>
>
> Someone mentioned in the archive that "ip default-network" is t
he answer
>for
> IGRP/24 to reach EIGRP summarized route 151.100.0.0/15 in R5. S
olie's
> solution key doesn't have the answer for this one.
>
> Is "ip default-network" the only way to solve this problem? Or
should I
> break it up to 151.100.0.0/16 and 151.101.0.0/16 in R3?
>
> Thanks,
> Chang
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:59 GMT-3