Jason, Chuck answered pretty completely, but there's another option that works well, changing administrative distances. At the redistribution points, set the default administrative distance for each protocol to something like 200. Next create an access-list that identifies all routes internal to each routing "domain", and override the default administrative distance (200) with the normal AD (something less than 200).
This has the effect of assigning all 'internal' routes the normal AD, and prevents route feedback. Routes will only be redistributed if they are not already present in the internal table. This also has the advantage of providing additional redundancy. If a route becomes inaccessible for some reason, but is still available via another routing protocol, it will be learned using the alternate path. With route filtering this is not possible. A very good explanation of this can be found in Chapter 13 of Doyle's TCP/IP Routing Vol. I. - Tom Jason Viera wrote: > Can't figure this one out. I am mutually redistributing eigrp into ospf > (dual redistribution points) and vice versa, I also have a separate > redistribution point in the eigrp domain which introduces external (AD170) > routes into the Eigrp domain, upon redistribution into OSPF these (external > eigrp) routes are given an AD of 110, creating suboptimal routing. The only > solution I could devise was based on modifying the distance of the external > routes in the eigrp domain. What would be the best approach to tackle the > problem, Any insight would be greatly appreciated!!!!!! > Thanks Jason Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=70716&t=70643 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
