[c-nsp] OSPF NSSA Question

[Annu Roopa]

Dan,
 
Wont having those subnets as a part of the OSPF process to advertise the networks and
 then have passive-interface solve the issue. By doing this we would have the interface
subnet advertised and at the same time prevent the OSPF neighbor relationship.
 
Let us know what u find.
 
Annu.


Dan Armstrong <dan at beanfield.com> wrote:
I have a question, that may seem rather silly.... but it is driving me nuts.

I have an NSSA area with a few access routers in it. They are connected via 
Ethernet to 2 distribution layer routers. The dist routers are advertising 
in a default route, and life is good.

I would like to conserve IP addresses, and I was hoping to put the interfaces 
on the access routers, and the corresponsing interfaces on the distribution 
layer routers all in the same subnet - rather than make a whackload 
of /30nets everywhere.

My problem is that when I do that, the two distribution layer routers form an 
adjacency with each other over the link%$#@#!!

I realize that is "normal" behaviour... but it is not deseriable..

Can I:

-Explicitly force the two dist routers somehow not to form the adjacency?
-Do I just go head and make my whackload of /30nets, and chew up IPs?

It seems to me that this much have come up before....

Any thoughts are appreciated.

Dan.


_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.