> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-portmaster-users@livingston.com
> [mailto:owner-portmaster-users@livingston.com]On Behalf Of Miquel van
> Smoorenburg
> Sent: Monday, May 03, 1999 11:53
> To: portmaster-users@livingston.com
> Subject: Re: (PM) OSPF summaries, E2 vs. E1 type ASE OSPF routes
>
>
> In article <cistron.19990502193408.53136@cuci.nl>,
> Stephen R. van den Berg <srb@cuci.nl> wrote:
> >So, the question is: how can I tell the PM3 to use E1 type routes or
> >(probably even better) internal-OSPF-routes instead of the default
> >E2 type routes it exports?
>
> I posted the a similar message to this list 6 weeks ago. No response, so
> I contacted our supplier (dataman) and asked them to send this to
> Livingston:
>
> There is a bug or misfeature in ComOS wrt OSPF route advertizements-
> static IP numbers (assigned by RADIUS) outside of the "pool"
> are announced
> by ComOS as "External type 2". This happens even if the area
> defined on the
> portmaster includes the range in which this IP number falls.
>
> This IMO is a bug - an interface route should always be advertized as
> "intra-area". Also it would be nice if this would happen for
> static routes
> assigned by radius as well (if they fall into the defined range
> of the area).
>
> I got _one_ reply from Lucent, after a month:
>
> According to my information about OSPF, when you assign
> pools/routes to PM products and defind the ospf area's
> you also need to implement the static ip's in these area's
> else the PM will always advertise those routes as external
> type 2.
>
> This can be interpreted in 2 ways:
>
> - They want me to use static IP numbers in the range of the pool.
> Ofcourse that is nonsense.
> - Define the OSPF area to include the static IP range. That is
> exactly what I did, yet it doesn't work, and hence my problem.
>
> Every message/request/question I sent to Lucent in the past year has
> been answered with non-answers followed by a long silence.
>
> I have a BACP problem and I pointed out the exact paragraph and line
> of the BACP RFC2125 to Lucent engineers to show what the PM3 does wrong
> and after mailing back and forth for _months_ I get an answer that said
> in short "exactly, so we hope your problem is solved now?". Sigh,
> that's a polite way to say "we are getting tired of you, get lost".
>
> Mike.
> --
> Indifference will certainly be the downfall of mankind, but who cares?
> --
> The From: and Reply-To: addresses are internal news2mail gateway
> addresses.
> Reply to the list or to miquels@cistron.nl (Miquel van Smoorenburg)
> -
> To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
> 'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
> Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>
>
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>