[quagga-users 9685] Re: OSPF "summary-address"

[Mike Tancsa]

At 02:39 PM 6/27/2008, Steve Bertrand wrote:
>Mike Tancsa wrote:
>
>>>However, (without being able to test it first-hand), will you get 
>>>the same result if you install a pull-up route for the /24's and 
>>>inject that into OSPF?
>>Do you mean not redistribute connected interface routes ?
>
>Yes, essentially that is what I was trying to get at.
>
>>I guess the other option would be to use an access list possibly 
>>and manually announce the various interface routes.
>
>I would probably have a better idea of the situation if you could 
>describe in what context you mean by 'interface'. Are you referring 
>to the physical interfaces in the box with many /32s on each, 
>sub-int per /32 etc.


Hi,
         The box acts as an LNS terminating many connections. If you 
are from the cisco world, this would be the equiv of hundreds of 
VirtualAccess interfaces.


>>The /24 is tied down to the disc0 interface, so that already is announced.
>
>Again, due to me not quite understanding the context, I can't 
>envision why you have to advertise each interface /32 at all, and/or to where.

95% of the interfaces would get IP addresses assigned out of a 
dynamic pool which would not need to be announced as /32s (hence the 
summary statement). Some users have static IP addreses and could land 
on a number of different LNSes... hence the need to dynamically 
announce those users with static IP addresses and subnets (if they have any).


         ---Mike