[c-nsp] passive-interface on VRF-specific OSPF process

[Ivan Pepelnjak]

Getting way off topic ...
 
Transit interface (more than one router) => Type 2 LSA
Stub interface (no OSPF neighbors) => stub network within Type 1 LSA
 
Ivan
 
http://www.ioshints.info/about
http://blog.ioshints.info/


  _____  

From: Manu Chao [mailto:linux.yahoo at gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 3:52 PM
To: Ivan Pepelnjak
Cc: Roman A. Nozdrin; Lukas Garberg; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] passive-interface on VRF-specific OSPF process


type-2 ;)


On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Ivan Pepelnjak <ip at ioshints.info> wrote:


> > while configuring an OSPF process for a VRF on a Cisco 3550-12G
> > (running 12.2(25)SE) I notice that the command "passive-interface"
> > is unavailable. How can this be? Is there another way I can
> suppress
> > routing updates on an interface?
>
> You can put actual network commands in ospf configuration section. For
> example:
>
> network 172.16.8.1 0.0.0.0
> network 172.17.0.30 0.0.0.0
> network 172.17.0.242 0.0.0.0
>
> It will activate interfaces in the target VRF only. You can
> redistribute
>   any other routes you need to announce.


... And we're back to the neverending question: ignoring the obvious
implications for stub areas, is it better to advertise connected subnets as
parts of router (type-1) LSA or as individual external (type-5) routes?

Any thoughts or preferences?

Ivan

http://www.ioshints.info/about
http://blog.ioshints.info/

_______________________________________________

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/