Is this correct? Off the cuff, I would think that the route with the lowest cost would be inserted into the table, and if they both have the same cost, wouldn't both routes be inserted and then load balancing occur?
Again this is not lab tested, but just my initial thoughts... Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: "Zsombor Papp" To: Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 12:44 PM Subject: RE: multiple ospf processes & route insertion [7:73727] > The process with the lower administrative distance will install the prefix > into the routing table. If the administrative distances are the same (and > they are by default), then the process that "comes first" will install the > route. In other words, it is not deterministic unless you change the default > admin distance. > > What are you trying to achieve with these ~3 OSPF routing processes? > > Thanks, > > Zsombor > > p b wrote: > > > > > > I'm considering a routing architecture where devices in the > > network would run ~3 OSPF routing processes. > > > > I think each routing process will be handling the routing > > of non-overlapping address blocks and thus the routes they > > give to the forwarding table should be disjoint. > > > > However, I'd like to understand what happens if two processes > > each were to provide the same prefix to the forwarding table. > > Specifically, what are the rules to determine which prefix > > is put into the routing table? > > > > Also be interested in any learnings folks might have had when > > they've run multiple OSPF processes. > > > > Thanks > **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: > http://shop.groupstudy.com > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=73751&t=73727 -------------------------------------------------- **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
