Phil, Without seeing your config, the first thing that comes to mind with your RIP experiment is do you have "no ip classless" on all your RIP routers? Before using "no auto-summary" with RIP, check the notes on your IOS version on CCO. Ver.12.2 specially has features that are new, you'd be amazed what the above command does.
Elmer ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phil Barker" To: Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 4:52 AM Subject: Discontiguous networks ? [7:45220] > Hi group, > I set up a Lab to highlight the problem that > discontiguous networks brings to distance vector > protocols. I seperated three Class B networks > (172.16.1.0/24, 172.16.2.0/24, 172.16.3.0/24) with the > class C networks (192.168.1.4/30 & 192.168.1.8/30). > > As expected with RIP 1, I can clearly see network > 172.16.0.0/16 being advertised over the serial > interfaces, with 'debug ip rip'. > > I then configured the Lab for RIP 2 thinking that this > would be a solution to the problem, since RIP 2 > advertises the subnet mask with the network address, > but ran up against the same problem as RIP 1. > > I can solve the problem using secondary addresses, > however, I feel that RIP 2 should also solve the > problem. > > Am I missing something here ? > > Just thinking out loud, should I have put 'no > auto-summary' under the rip routing ? maybe it > defaults to classful behaviour anyway !!! > > Appreciate any responses. > > Phil. > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Everything you'll ever need on one web page > from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts > http://uk.my.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45224&t=45220 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
