From: Elias Chari (elias.chari@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Aug 03 2006 - 08:46:09 ART
Hi Ismail,
I see what you mean....
I think the question says "the routers do not need to see specific
information..." as opposed to the routers should only receive a default from
R5.
I think this is one of those questions that you may have to ask the proctor
for further clarification as it is all to do with the wording...
Rgds
Elias
On 8/3/06, ismail el-shalh <ishelh_mdsa@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Elias, Hi Group
>
>
> Here is the topology
>
> -------139.X.48.0/24------R4
> | |
> | |
> (F0/4) |PPP
> | |
> SW2 139.X.45.0/24
> | |
> (F0/5) |
> | |
> | |
> -----139.X.58.0/24------R5--139.X.25.0/24 & 139.X.15.0/24---(Frame-relay
> configured in OSPF DOMAIN)
>
> R5 has two subinterfaces, one point to pint interface with R1 in the
> subnet range 139.X.15.0/24 and the second pont to point to R2 in the
> subnet range 139.1.25.0/24
>
>
>
> I do understand your point that no need to filter because RIP is the only
> protocol running between R4, SW2 and R5 so only a default route to be
> injected is enough, I was saying this to myself also, but because
> 139.X.15.0 and 139.X.25.0 will fall on the same range of RIP updates,
> these subnets are propagated to R4 and SW2
>
> here is the configuration of R5 according to the IEWB solution :
>
> Rack1R5#show run | b router rip
> router rip
> version 2
> timers basic 3 18 18 24
>
> network 139.1.0.0
> network 150.1.0.0
> default-information originate
> no auto-summary
>
> and here is the output of R4 as a result
>
> Rack1R4#show ip route rip
> 139.1.0.0/16 is variably subnetted, 7 subnets, 2 masks
> R 139.1.15.0/24 [120/2] via 139.1.48.8, 00:00:01, Ethernet1
> [120/2] via 139.1.45.5, 00:00:01, Serial1
> R 139.1.5.0/24 [120/2] via 139.1.48.8, 00:00:01, Ethernet1
> [120/2] via 139.1.45.5, 00:00:01, Serial1
> R 139.1.25.0/24 [120/2] via 139.1.48.8, 00:00:01, Ethernet1
> [120/2] via 139.1.45.5, 00:00:01, Serial1
> R 139.1.58.0/24 [120/1] via 139.1.48.8, 00:00:01, Ethernet1
> 150.1.0.0/24 is subnetted, 3 subnets
> R 150.1.5.0 [120/2] via 139.1.45.5, 00:00:01, Serial1
> [120/2] via 139.1.48.8, 00:00:01, Ethernet1
> R 150.1.8.0 [120/1] via 139.1.48.8, 00:00:01, Ethernet1
> R* 0.0.0.0/0 [120/2] via 139.1.45.5, 00:00:01, Serial1
> [120/2] via 139.1.48.8, 00:00:01, Ethernet1
>
> notice 139.1.25.0/24 and 139.1.15.0/24, these are the frame-relay subnets,
> I do not want those subnets to appear in R4 because there is no point for
> them to be there, only a default route like the last route R* will be
> enough, So I had no way other than using the command distribute-list with a
> prefix of 0.0.0.0/0 but again the solution is not using this method and I
> really want to know why , why the solution only listed the
> default-information originate without a distribute-list ?
>
>
> Ismail
>
>
>
>
> *Elias Chari <elias.chari@gmail.com>* wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I don't think you have given us sufficient info to discuss this,
> i.etopology, however if I understand the task correctly, this is to do
>
> with not
> having to redistribute ospf into rip. Since r5, r4 and sw2 are already in
> rip, they all know the rip routes, therefore why filter? It seems
> unnecesary...r5 knows about the ospf routes and injects a default into rip
>
> so that r4 and sw2 have reachability to the rest of the network.
>
> Also r4 will load balance to destinations in the ospf domain based on the
> default, but needs an offset-list so that the default seen by r5 and r2
> has
> the same metric.
>
> Regards,
> Elias
>
>
> On 8/2/06, ismail el-shalh wrote:
> >
> > Hi group,
> >
> > please let me know if the way I am understanding the question is right
> or
> > wrong,
> >
> > the task is stating that since R5 is the only connection between the
> OSPF
> > and RIP domains R4 and SW2 do not need specific reachability information
> > about the rest of the network.
> > configure R5 to inject a default route into RIP to provide rechability
> to
> > the OSPF domain.
> > R4 should load balance traffic destined to the OSPF domain between both
> R5
> > and SW2
> >
> >
> >
> > I understood that R5 should not propagate any rip routes other than a
> > default route but in the solution only "default-information originate"
> > command was there! which means that also the other rip routes will get
> into
> > R4 and SW2
> >
> > here is my solution :
> >
> >
> >
> > Rack1R5#show run | b router rip
> > router rip
> > version 2
> > network 139.1.0.0
> > default-information originate
> > distribute-list prefix DEFAULT out FastEthernet0/1
> > distribute-list prefix DEFAULT out Serial0/1
> > no auto-summary
> >
> > ip prefix-list DEFAULT seq 5 permit 0.0.0.0/0
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Rack1R4#show ip route rip
> > 139.1.0.0/16 is variably subnetted, 4 subnets, 2 masks
> > R 139.1.58.0/24 [120/1] via 139.1.48.8, 00:00:02, Ethernet1
> > R* 0.0.0.0/0 [120/2] via 139.1.45.5, 00:00:07, Serial1
> > [120/2] via 139.1.48.8, 00:00:02, Ethernet1
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Groups are talking. We4re listening. Check out the handy changes to
> Yahoo!
>
> > Groups.
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------
> How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call
> rates.
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman8/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=39663/*http://voice.yahoo.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 01 2006 - 15:41:55 ART