A virtual link allows an ABR to Hop accross a transit area to reach area 0.
Generally speaking, they are to be avoided. Virtual links are more
acceptable in a migration situation, or if Area 0 has been segmented (I.e.
as a temp fix).
The little book of common sense says if it isn't broke then there is no
reason to fix it, unless you are a consultant and the customer is willing to
pay for it.
Ejay Hire
-----Original Message-----
From: Vincent Chong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 3:54 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: OSPF virtual link Question [7:3154]
Hi;
The following scenario
[RouteA area0][area0 RouterB area1]<--[area1
RouterC area4]
|
|
|
|
|______________Virtual link_______________________|
Does this topology is valid in OSPF?
I belive that the configuration has topology error, but the owener
said it was
working fine without authenication.
For I am not familiar with Virtual link, ay comment are welcome?
Best Rgds;
Vincent Chong
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=3206&t=3154
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
