Redsitribution between ospf and eigrp ??

OK, this one's got me stumped, so I'll throw it out here & see if anybody knows what I've missed. I have a simple LAN, with a dsl router ("A") connecting it to the internet. (This was existing home setup.) To that, I've added some switches and routers for lab purposes. Router "C" connects a second ethernet LAN, and ties it in to the main LAN via router "B", with a serial link between B and C. Each router also has a loopback interface configured, just to give extra network destinations to play with.

Router A - 827, 12.3, eigrp only Network AB - ethernet LAN, 10.42.1.0/24 Router B - 1720, 12.1, eigrp & ospf Network BC - point-to-point link, 192.168.3.128/25 Router C - 2501, 12.0, ospf only Network C2 - ethernet LAN, 192.168.3.0/25

Initially, I'd set it up with all 3 routers running RIP, and checked it out. Everything worked as expected. Then I tried changing to OSPF instead. I quickly found that the 827 doesn't support OSPF, so decided to use EIGRP on one side and OSPF on the other, just to experiment with redistribution at the same time. (Relevant portions of router configs can be seen below.) While the eigrp routes redistribute just fine to the ospf side, nothing I've tried seems to propagate the ospf routes over to the eigrp side.

Under the "router ospf" section, I found several items that facilitated moving routes into ospf, including the "subnets" keyword and the "default-information" statement. Unfortunately, I can't find anything that does the equivalent in the other direction. Everything I could find on the Cisco site indicated that it ought to work fine just the way I've got it, but obviously it doesn't.

I'm guessing that whatever I'm doing wrong is on router "B". As you can see from its routing table, it knows everything. Router "C" has learned of the default route, as well as A's loopback interface (.99) and the main LAN (10.42.1.0). Router "A", however, has not learned about C's loopback (.58), the additional LAN hanging off of C (192.168.3.0/25), or the p-p link between them (192.168.3.128/25). Adding "redistribute connected" lets A see the p-p link, but not the two networks beyond C. Various combinations of adding & removing auto summarization don't cure it either.

So if anybody recognizes something familiar here, or can tell me what I've missed, I'd appreciate hearing about it. Also, if anybody knows of a way to debug the actual redistributing process, that would also be useful.

-----

Router "A" configuration (significant portions):

version 12.3 ip subnet-zero interface Loopback1 ip address 10.42.99.1 255.255.255.0 ! interface Ethernet0 description LAN Connection ip address 10.42.1.250 255.255.255.0 ip nat inside hold-queue 100 out ! router eigrp 42 redistribute static passive-interface Dialer1 network 10.0.0.0 no auto-summary no eigrp log-neighbor-changes ! ip classless ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Dialer1

----- Router "B" configuration:

version 12.1 ip subnet-zero interface Loopback0 ip address 192.168.56.1 255.255.255.0 ! interface Serial0 ip address 192.168.3.129 255.255.255.128 encapsulation ppp clockrate 1300000 ! interface FastEthernet0 ip address 10.42.1.6 255.255.255.0 speed auto ! router eigrp 42 redistribute ospf 1 network 10.0.0.0 eigrp log-neighbor-changes ! router ospf 1 log-adjacency-changes redistribute eigrp 42 metric 55 subnets network 192.168.0.0 0.0.255.255 area 0 default-information originate always ! ip classless

----- Router "C" configuration:

version 12.0 ! ip subnet-zero ! interface Loopback0 ip address 192.168.58.1 255.255.255.0 no ip directed-broadcast ! interface Ethernet0 ip address 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.128 ip helper-address 10.42.1.10 no ip directed-broadcast ! interface Serial0 ip address 192.168.3.130 255.255.255.128 no ip directed-broadcast encapsulation ppp ! router ospf 1 log-adjacency-changes network 192.168.0.0 0.0.255.255 area 0 ! ip classless !

-----

Routing Tables: From router "A": Gateway of last resort is 0.0.0.0 to network 0.0.0.0

xxx.xx.xx.xx/29 is subnetted, 1 subnets C xxx.xx.xxx.xx is directly connected, Dialer1 D 192.168.56.0/24 [90/409600] via 10.42.1.6, 00:10:15, Ethernet0 10.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 2 subnets C 10.42.1.0 is directly connected, Ethernet0 C 10.42.99.0 is directly connected, Loopback1 xxx.xx.x.x/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets C xxx.xx.x.xx is directly connected, Dialer1 S* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, Dialer1

From router "B": Gateway of last resort is 10.42.1.250 to network 0.0.0.0

192.168.58.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets O 192.168.58.1 [110/65] via 192.168.3.130, 02:28:55, Serial0 C 192.168.56.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback0 10.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 2 subnets C 10.42.1.0 is directly connected, FastEthernet0 D 10.42.99.0 [90/156160] via 10.42.1.250, 00:04:53, FastEthernet0 192.168.3.0/24 is variably subnetted, 3 subnets, 2 masks O 192.168.3.0/25 [110/74] via 192.168.3.130, 02:28:55, Serial0 C 192.168.3.130/32 is directly connected, Serial0 C 192.168.3.128/25 is directly connected, Serial0 D*EX 0.0.0.0/0 [170/2181120] via 10.42.1.250, 00:04:54, FastEthernet0

From router "C": Gateway of last resort is 192.168.3.129 to network 0.0.0.0

C 192.168.58.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback0 192.168.56.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets O 192.168.56.1 [110/65] via 192.168.3.129, 02:30:13, Serial0 10.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 2 subnets O E2 10.42.1.0 [110/55] via 192.168.3.129, 02:30:13, Serial0 O E2 10.42.99.0 [110/55] via 192.168.3.129, 00:06:20, Serial0 192.168.3.0/24 is variably subnetted, 3 subnets, 2 masks C 192.168.3.0/25 is directly connected, Ethernet0 C 192.168.3.129/32 is directly connected, Serial0 C 192.168.3.128/25 is directly connected, Serial0 O*E2 0.0.0.0/0 [110/1] via 192.168.3.129, 02:30:13, Serial0

Reply to
Mike Dorn
Loading thread data ...

Try defining the default-metric settings in the EIGRP config on Router B. I suspect that if the metrics aren't defined, routes won't be redistributed into EIGRP.

Reply to
Brad H

That does it. I guess I'd assummed it would use some kind of default value if you didn't configure it, rather than simply not attempting the redistribution at all. One tends not to get too concerned about metrics until there are multiple routes to choose from; this illustrates the fact that you need to pay attention to them regardless.

Reply to
Mike Dorn

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.