Ohhh I'm sorry I meant to say 10.2.0.0/16
And not 10.2.0.0/24; but the concepts and the Debugs should be useful
Caffeine had not kick in yet
Regards
Victor.-
-----Mensaje original-----
De: Victor Cappuccio [mailto:cvictor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Enviado el: Jueves, 14 de Septiembre de 2006 10:31 a.m.
Para: 'Roman Trafidlo'; 'cisco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Asunto: RE: RIP summarization in Cisco Documentation [7:113621]
Hi Roman,
I would think that the configuration is OK, but in order to generate the
summary you need to have the 10.2.0.0/24 or longer match in your routing
table in order to generate that summary route
10.1.1.0/24 10.2.0.0/24, but yet is in the Mayor Class
Network. RIP v2 supports VLSM
Interface IP-Address OK? Method Status
Protocol
Ethernet0/0 192.168.12.5 YES NVRAM up
up
Serial0/0 192.168.13.1 YES NVRAM up
up
Loopback1 10.2.1.1 YES manual up
up
R5(config-if)#router rip
R5(config-router)#net 10.0.0.0
R5(config-router)#
Mar 1 06:26:39.452: RIP: sending v2 flash update to 192.168.13.3 via
Serial0/0 (192.168.13.1)
Mar 1 06:26:39.452: RIP: build flash update entries
Mar 1 06:26:39.452: 10.2.0.0/16 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0 >>> The
Value of the metric now is INFINITE
HTH
Victor.-
-----Mensaje original-----
De: nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Enviado el: Jueves, 14 de Septiembre de 2006 10:06 a.m.
Para: cisco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Asunto: RIP summarization in Cisco Documentation [7:113621]
The example for RIP summarization in the Cisco configuration guide has this
example:
interface Ethernet1
ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.0
ip summary-address rip 10.2.0.0 255.255.0.0
no ip split-horizon
router rip
network 10.0.0.0
Why would you summarize and exclude the IP range of the interface? Is this
an error or is there a good reason to do this?
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=113625&t=113621
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
