Charles,
If you look at the show ip ospf nei output on router B:
> 192.168.210.4 1 FULL/ - 00:00:32 192.168.200.202 Serial2/0
> 192.168.213.1 1 FULL/ - 00:00:39 192.168.200.65 Serial4/0
> 192.168.210.4 1 FULL/ - 00:00:33 192.168.200.206 Serial5/0/1:0
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This Serial5/0/1:0 is a fractional T1 and if you do show int for this
you will see a bandwidth value of 64K where as Serial 2/0 would show
you the bandwidth as 1544K. Obviously route B would prefer all routes
via serial2/0.
Faraz Shamim
sshamim@cisco.com
>
>
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Martin, Christian wrote:
>
> > Chales,
> >
> > Can you draw this out? Which side cannot see the other? Is the new split
> > side connected to a LAN? Is there a DR election happening here?
>
> 2xT1
> -------- router A
> router C
> 2xT1
> -------- router B
>
> I simply moved "C" from "A" to "B" (no ip changes). A and B have
> identical configs for ospf and the two serial interfaces. A and B are
> connected via a T3 and speak OSPF. There were no changes made to C. C
> sees routes via both T1's. B only sees routes via one T1.
>
> 'show ip ospf neigh detail' verifies that both links are up and exchanging
> routes. Here's the brief output:
>
> C:
> Inch-Whitehall-gw>show ip ospf neighbor
>
> Neighbor ID Pri State Dead Time Address
> Interface
> 192.168.210.1 1 FULL/ - 00:00:36 192.168.200.205 Serial0/0
> 192.168.210.1 1 FULL/ - 00:00:36 192.168.200.201 Serial0/1
>
> (here's a route learned from B)
> Inch-Whitehall-gw>show ip route 192.168.198.0
> Routing entry for 192.168.198.0/24, 2 known subnets
> [...]
> O E2 192.168.198.0/26 [110/20] via 192.168.200.201, 1d11h, Serial0/1
> [110/20] via 192.168.200.205, 1d11h, Serial0/0
>
> B:
>
> core-2>sh ip ospf neighbor
>
> Neighbor ID Pri State Dead Time Address
> Interface
> 192.168.210.4 1 FULL/ - 00:00:32 192.168.200.202 Serial2/0
> 192.168.213.1 1 FULL/ - 00:00:39 192.168.200.65 Serial4/0
> 192.168.210.4 1 FULL/ - 00:00:33 192.168.200.206 Serial5/0/1:0
> (2/0 and 5/0/1 are the two T1's)
>
> (here's a route learned from C - only one path)
> core-2>show ip route 192.168.192.0
> Routing entry for 192.168.192.0/24, 4 known subnets
> Variably subnetted with 4 masks
> Redistributing via ospf 1
>
> O E2 192.168.192.128/30 [110/20] via 192.168.200.202, 1d11h, Serial2/0
> O E2 192.168.192.64/27 [110/20] via 192.168.200.202, 1d11h, Serial2/0
> O E2 192.168.192.96/28 [110/20] via 192.168.200.202, 1d11h, Serial2/0
>
> Any ideas? Sorry for all the clutter, I was hoping that putting all this
> info together would help me see the problem...
>
> Thanks,
>
> Charles
>
> > chris
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Charles Sprickman [mailto:spork@inch.com]
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2001 11:52 AM
> > > To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> > > Subject: [nsp] OSPF quickie
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Small OSPF problem that's got me scratching my head... I just moved a
> > > connection from one router to another (two T1's). Both the previous
> > > router these went back to and the new one are in the same
> > > ospf area, and
> > > I've verified that all the neighbors see each other.
> > >
> > > On the old router, I was seeing routes from the remote side
> > > via both T1
> > > connections, which gave me a sort of load-balancing between
> > > the two lines.
> > > On the new router, even though I see the remote side listed
> > > as a neighbor
> > > twice, I only see routes via one T1.
> > >
> > > OSPF config is identical on both routers, is there a global switch I'm
> > > missing somewhere? I know this is something silly and
> > > obvious, but I'm
> > > not seeing it... Old router is running 12.0.7T, new is 12.0.7XE1.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Charles
> > >
> > > | Charles Sprickman | Internet Channel
> > > | INCH System Administration Team | (212)243-5200
> > > | spork@inch.com | access@inch.com
> > >
> >
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:34 EDT