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

Stephen R. van den Berg (srb@cuci.nl)
Fri, 7 May 1999 17:18:06 +0200

Jeff Haas wrote:
>On Wed, May 05, 1999 at 04:28:44PM +0200, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
>> >If its emitting every single one as this, you need to set a poolsize.
>>
>> He said "RADIUS-assigned". Please read the rest of this thread first.

>Framed-IP-Address = 255.255.255.254 is a perfectly legal RADIUS-assigned
>IP address. It is in almost every example in Livingston's documentation.

>The problem has nothing to do with RADIUS. The problem is an IP
>that is assigned that is not in the pool and not in the defined area.

But that *is* exactly the point. The assigned address is *not* in the
pool, but *is* in the defined area; and yet it is exported as an ASE type 2
route to the rest of the OSPF cloud.

-- 
Sincerely,                                                          srb@cuci.nl
           Stephen R. van den Berg (AKA BuGless).


"ICMP: The protocol that goes PING!"
-
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/>