And, most importantly, you're less likely to lose track or get confused.

On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 11:00 AM, <[email protected]>wrote:

> Send CCIE_RS mailing list submissions to
>         [email protected]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         [email protected]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         [email protected]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of CCIE_RS digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. single router Id and multiple IGPs (max kamali)
>    2. Re: single router Id and multiple IGPs (Bob McCouch)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 17:11:08 -0700
> From: max kamali <[email protected]>
> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] single router Id and multiple IGPs
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Howdy All,
>
> Are there any down-sides to using the same router ID (sourced from a
> loopback interface) for both OSPF and EIGRP and have both protocols
> advertize them as their own, in the same router? also, are there any
> hidden land mines if you are mutually redistributing both IGPs in this
> scenario?
>
> I have been experimenting with this scenario and I can't seem to find
> any issues in this scenario in a lab environment with 3 routers.
>
> (eigrp rtr)---------(eigrp/ospf rtr)-----------(ospf rtr)
>
>
> Thanks
> Max
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 20:17:04 -0400
> From: Bob McCouch <[email protected]>
> To: max kamali <[email protected]>
> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] single router Id and multiple IGPs
> Message-ID: <-7166774375651145109@unknownmsgid>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> It is actually required to have matching RIDs for redistributing
> between OSPF and BGP, IIRC.
>
> No downsides that I know of. Each IGP works independently and is
> unaware of what RID another is using even during redistribution.
>
> Bob
> --
> Sent from my iPhone, please excuse any typos.
>
> On May 20, 2013, at 8:14 PM, max kamali <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Howdy All,
> >
> > Are there any down-sides to using the same router ID (sourced from a
> loopback interface) for both OSPF and EIGRP and have both protocols
> advertize them as their own, in the same router? also, are there any hidden
> land mines if you are mutually redistributing both IGPs in this scenario?
> >
> > I have been experimenting with this scenario and I can't seem to find
> any issues in this scenario in a lab environment with 3 routers.
> >
> > (eigrp rtr)---------(eigrp/ospf rtr)-----------(ospf rtr)
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> > Max
> > _______________________________________________
> > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training,
> please visit www.ipexpert.com
> >
> > Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
> www.PlatinumPlacement.com
> >
> > http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
>
>
> End of CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 88, Issue 16
> ***************************************
>
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out 
www.PlatinumPlacement.com

http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs

Reply via email to