Cisco Nuts, Here is what I did in the lab: I entered a class c loopback address on a router with a /32 mask. We'll call that router b. I had both OSPF and EIGRP running with all of the defaults on routers b and router a. With a /24 network statement under both EIGRP and OSPF on router b, I had just the EIGRP route in the table of router a. Adding a /32 network statement under the router b OSPF config results in two entries in the router a table - the /24 EIGRP route and the /32 OSPF route. I then disabled EIGRP autosummary on router b. Now router a has no OSPF routes in the table. What does all of that prove? That administrative distance always wins the war - but only where the masks are equal. A more specific mask is a whole different network.
Again, I think the appearance of the /32 OSPF routes in your tables of your routers has to do with how OSPF handles p-t-mp NBMA circuits (that "additional" information must include /32 addresses of neighbors). As for your table of router b, I would check to see that EIGRP autosummary is disabled on all routers and also verify that the appropriate network statements with the appropriate masks are in place. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=31644&t=31597 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
