Hi Kim, Thanks for the kind words, and we will be working hard to get you there as well! Regarding your OSPF situation there, I honestly never tried doing two OSPF processes and trying to put the same interface into area 0 in both processes. Clearly, as you mention there it doesn't seem to work. I don't know of any specific documentation to support that, but when in doubt lab it up, thats the right mentality. What I was trying to explain to Robert was that in the event you have two different area 0's in your diagram, but they are a quite a distance apart -- One alternative option to creating a ton of virtual links would be to just run one of them in a seperate OSPF process, and redistribute. This can come in handy particuarly when the second area 0 that is all the way on the other side of your network happens to also be on the edge of your OSPF domain as well. Now, in that case we would be running two processes, but NOT be running two OSPF processes on the same interface like you have here. Interesting stuff though!
Regards, Joe Astorino CCIE #24347 (R&S) Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc. URL: http://www.IPexpert.com <http://www.ipexpert.com/> _____ From: Kim Pedersen [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 1:59 AM To: Joe Astorino Cc: Robert S Wyzykowski; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Volume 3 Lab8 Section 3.3 Hi Joe, Congrats with your number!! I have tried to lab up a scenario with two ospf instances on the same router, mapping the same interfaces to area 0 in both. I thought i read somewhere that OSPFv2 doesnt have any way to differentiate this on the same subnet, as OSPFv3 does with a sort of instance-field. Results show that only one adjacency will be made: R1 <-> R2, where R1 has two instances of OSPF, both marking the link between R1 and R2, as being in area 0. Only instance 1 will actually show up, and be adjacent with from R2. Are there any documentation regarding this behavior? Sincerely, Kim Pedersen On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 7:38 AM, Joe Astorino <[email protected]> wrote: Hey Robert, In general, yes you CAN connect two discontiguous area 0's in OSPF but you are not REQUIRED to necessarily. Another option is to have seperate OSPF processes running, and just use redistribution. If it is a giant pain in the butt to connect the two area 0's you may just want to run a seperate process of OSPF all together on one of the routers, then just redistribute that process. Does that make sense? Regards, Joe Astorino CCIE #24347 (R&S) Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc. URL: http://www.IPexpert.com <http://www.ipexpert.com/> _____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robert S Wyzykowski Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 12:38 AM To: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Volume 3 Lab8 Section 3.3 In this topology, there are two separate OSPF Domains, with separate Area 0s, and the proctor guide did not connect them together. I was under the impression if you have OSPF in different areas of the network, it was a requirement to make sure it was one big OSPF domain. In this lab they are separate. Any thoughts? Robert Wyzykowski Manager, Global Telecommunications IMERYS 30 Mansell Court East - Suite 220 Roswell, GA, USA Phone: +1 770 645 3734 Mobile: +1 404-434 9000 From: jmangawang <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: 05/14/2009 04:14 PM Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Two seemingly inconsequential CCIE Lab questions for Joe _____ Joe, First, congratulations on getting your CCIE. I've been a fan of your blog ever since starting my own journey back in March and found your experiences match a lot of my own. Onto the questions: 1) How big is the desk area? 2) How big is the monitor and what is the resolution? I know these may seem dumb, but during my initial study phase, I've basically taken up my entire dining room table (seats 8) and use a 22" widescreen monitor with a really high resolution. I'd hate to get there only to find out that we have to use an old 14" CRT on an elementary school desk (I know this is not the case, but I hope you get the visualization). Thanks, Jason No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.323 / Virus Database: 270.12.29/2114 - Release Date: 05/14/09 06:28:00 -- // Freedom Matters No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.323 / Virus Database: 270.12.29/2114 - Release Date: 05/14/09 06:28:00
