There you go:
R2---R5
R2:
interface Serial0/2/0
ip address 192.168.25.2 255.255.255.0
ip ospf network point-to-point
!
router ospf 1
network 192.168.0.0 0.0.255.255 area 0
!
R5:
interface Serial0/2/0
ip address 192.168.25.5 255.255.255.0
ip ospf network broadcast
!
router ospf 1
network 192.168.0.0 0.0.255.255 area 0
!
R2:
R2#sh ip ospf nei
Neighbor ID Pri State Dead Time Address Interface
192.168.0.5 0 FULL/ - 00:00:38 192.168.25.5 Serial0/2/0
R2#sh ip ospf data
OSPF Router with ID (192.168.0.2) (Process ID 1)
Router Link States (Area 0)
Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum Link count
192.168.0.2 192.168.0.2 114 0x80000003 0x00F1E7 3
192.168.0.5 192.168.0.5 115 0x80000003 0x0091F4 2
Net Link States (Area 0)
Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum
192.168.25.5 192.168.0.5 115 0x80000001 0x0086E3
R2#sh ip route ospf
R5:
R5#sh ip ospf nei
Neighbor ID Pri State Dead Time Address Interface
192.168.0.2 1 FULL/BDR 00:00:36 192.168.25.2 Serial0/2/0
R5#sh ip ospf data
OSPF Router with ID (192.168.0.5) (Process ID 1)
Router Link States (Area 0)
Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum Link count
192.168.0.2 192.168.0.2 115 0x80000003 0x00F1E7 3
192.168.0.5 192.168.0.5 114 0x80000003 0x0091F4 2
Net Link States (Area 0)
Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum
192.168.25.5 192.168.0.5 114 0x80000001 0x0086E3
R5#sh ip route ospf
--
Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Marko Milivojevic <[email protected]> wrote:
> Try it... It's such a common problem we even have it in many of our workbooks.
>
> Link state updates are not multicast.
>
> --
> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
> Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:10 AM, HEMANTH RAJ <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Marko ,
>>
>> hmm i don't see my databases synchronized if i have one side as BCAST and
>> other side as point to point.
>> how will DR accept on 224.0.0.5 if he thinks others are DRother
>> how will the DB are synced ?
>> could u explain me a bit more ?
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 9:47 PM, Marko Milivojevic <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Venkee <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > In this case, from one end (BCAST), would see the type-2 lsa in database
>>> > but
>>> > not on router where we have p-t-p, he might have said this
>>>
>>> That is correct. However, if you look at the adjacency between the two
>>> routers, it would appear as perfectly valid and the databases will be
>>> in sync.
>>>
>>> Another difference you will see in the database is the type of link in
>>> Type-1 LSA that will be Point-to-point/Stub on the p2p side and
>>> Transit on the broadcast side. This discrepancy is the one routers
>>> will use to identify the problem and cause them not to "trust" each
>>> other.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
>>> Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Problems arise because we talk,problems are not solved because we don't talk
>> So good or bad talk to your affectionate one's freely.
>>
>> Yours Friendly,
>> H P HEMANTH RAJ
>> CCIE#28593 (R&S)
>>
>>
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit
www.ipexpert.com
Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
www.PlatinumPlacement.com
http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
