From: iosluver@gmail.com
Date: Tue Sep 25 2007 - 17:24:24 ART
Hi,
I was wondering if this is possible or totally borderline silly.
I came across a task in IE WB v3 where 2 routers were required to excahge routes via RIP. The problem in that task was the 2 routers did not share a common subnet but were aware off each others subnets by way of peer neighbor routes (PPPoFR) & by disabling the sanity check for valid routes (no validate-update-source). For details on the workings of that task please refer IE WB v3 VOL 2 Lab 6 Task 4.1. This got me thinking about how this could be used on an ethernet segment.
For example consider this
TOPOLOGY:-
R3
| RIPv2
| 10.3.0.0/24 - VLAN 30
|
R1------------R2------
VLAN 10 | RIPv2
| 10.4.0.0/24 VLAN 40
|
R4
R1 :- F0/0 -- 192.168.1.1/24
R2 :- FO/0.10 --- 10.1.0.2/24 (VLAN 10)
R2 :- FO/0.30 --- 10.3.0.2/24 (VLAN 30)
R2 :- FO/0.40 --- 10.4.0.2/24 (VLAN 40)
R1
router rip
version 2
network 192.168.1.0
no auto-summary
ip nat inside source static 192.168.1.1 10.1.0.1
So what happens here is rip updates are exchanged & subsequently installed on both routers. The issue ofcourse is recursive lookup & next-hop resolution which will never work because R1 will not have a route to 10.1.1.2 (next hop) for all rip routes learnt from R2 & likewise in the reverse direction. This was not an issue in the InternetWork Expert Task because PPP came to the rescue, here though it gets ugly really fast. Assuming I haven't completely lost my mind (which I'm close to by the way lol), can someone suggest a way to make this work. I thought of static routes which may work though I haven't connected the dots on that yet..Any takers
Thanks
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 06 2007 - 12:01:16 ART