Robert,

If you have two area 0s separated by another routing protocol, you do not
have to make them one domain. They are just separate OSPF domains. I think
in this lab there was about 6 "routing domains." Quite fun :)

Bryan Bartik
CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP
Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc.
URL: http://www.IPexpert.com

On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 6:52 AM, Kim Pedersen <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>   Yeah it is. Just played around with it a bit more. Even if you remove the
> network statement that assigns an interface to run the OSPF instance, the
> other one wont take over until you go into that instance and do a "no
> network ..." and then a "network ..." again. Then it will form an adjacency
> in the other instance.
>
>   Just one of those things i guess...
>
> Sincerely,
> Kim
>
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Jared Scrivener 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>  I hadn’t observed that before and it seems a little odd (although I
>> don’t have time to lab it up now so I’ll trust you have).
>>
>>
>>
>> I know that with OSPFv3 we should be able to run two separate processes on
>> the same interface to peer with two totally separate neighbors. That’s kind
>> of cool and perhaps just another reason to start deploying IPv6 ASAP.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>>
>> Jared Scrivener CCIE3 #16983 (R&S, Security, SP), CISSP
>>
>> Sr. Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc.
>>
>> URL: http://www.IPexpert.com
>>
>> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
>>
>> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
>>
>> Mailto: [email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
>> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Kim Pedersen
>> *Sent:* Friday, 15 May 2009 4:18 AM
>> *To:* Joe Astorino
>> *Cc:* [email protected]; [email protected]
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Volume 3 Lab8 Section 3.3
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>>   I have no doubt that you will :)
>>   It seems when doing this, the interface will actually only show up in
>> one of the proccesses (the first one configured) at a time. A built in
>> mechanism for avoiding poor design choices i guess.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Kim Pedersen
>>
>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Joe Astorino <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> 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?
>>
>> *Error! Filename not specified.*
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> // Freedom Matters
>>
>
>
>
> --
> // Freedom Matters
>
>


--

Reply via email to