Re: (PM) OSPF summaries, E2 vs. E1 type ASE OSPF routes

Marc Rouleau (mer@networkwcs.com)
Tue, 4 May 1999 16:41:43 -0500

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Thomas C Kinnen: "Re: (PM) Limiting modem access to V34+"
Previous message: jon-lists: "Re: (PM) Modem Code"
Maybe in reply to: Stephen R. van den Berg: "(PM) OSPF summaries, E2 vs. E1 type ASE OSPF routes"

On May 3, 2:26pm, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> James Courtier-Dutton <dutton@livingston-ent.co.uk> wrote:
>> What breaks because they are E2 routes?
>
> No summarization.

FWIW, we too would love to have a way to summarize OSPF-generated routes.
We have to leave OSPF off because ComOS insists on advertising every
RADIUS-assigned connected address as a /32.

-- Marc Rouleau

VP and Chief Technology Officer Voice: (812) 456.1226 Fax: (812) 461.3363
Community Telephone Corporation http://www.communitytelephone.com

-
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/>

Next message: Thomas C Kinnen: "Re: (PM) Limiting modem access to V34+"
Previous message: jon-lists: "Re: (PM) Modem Code"
Maybe in reply to: Stephen R. van den Berg: "(PM) OSPF summaries, E2 vs. E1 type ASE OSPF routes"