mits, which will make her irresistible. But
then:
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MySisterIsOffLimits
-Original Message-
From: AF On Behalf Of Dennis Burgess via AF
Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2020 3:16 PM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
Cc: Dennis Burgess
Subject: Re
ve Users Group'
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PPPoE and /32's
The only reason I can think of, is that you have to be careful if you assign an
IP address like 192.168.88.1 or 169.254.1.x to an interface for maybe
administrative purposes, if that interface ever becomes active, and you don't
Of Ken Hohhof
Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2020 4:57 PM
To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PPPoE and /32's
The only reason I can think of, is that you have to be careful if you assign an
IP address like 192.168.88.1 or 169.254.1.x to an interface for maybe
y 2, 2020 3:16 PM
To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group
Cc: Dennis Burgess
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PPPoE and /32's
NEVER redistribute connected... bad bad bad .
The sub area you can announce out the /25 or whatever it is, but keep /32s from
leaving the stub area. Your OSPF-out filters do
ite: http://www.linktechs.net
Create Wireless Coverage’s with www.towercoverage.com
-Original Message-
From: AF On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2020 12:10 PM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: [AFMUG] PPPoE and /32's
If you redistribute connected routes on a PPPoE server y
On Behalf Of Adam
Moffett
Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2020 12:26 PM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PPPoE and /32's
Good point.
On 1/2/2020 1:22 PM, Jes
accomplish it, but those seem to
do the trick.
From: AF On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2020 12:26 PM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] PPPoE and /32's
Good point.
On 1/2/2020 1:22 PM, Jesse DuPont wrote:
How are you getting around it doing a /32 for
Good point.
On 1/2/2020 1:22 PM, Jesse DuPont wrote:
How are you getting around it doing a /32 for each PPPoE session right
now? Even if you don't do redistribute connected, but have the whole,
let's say, /24 in OSPF-Networks, there will be an entry for each /32
in all the route tables regardl
How are you getting around it doing a /32 for each PPPoE session
right now? Even if you don't do redistribute connected, but have the
whole, let's say, /24 in OSPF-Networks, there will be an entry for
each /32 in all the route tables regardless because OSPF uses the
mask
I don't really see why... you could also just filter out the /32's if you
needed to redistribute connected routes for some other reason (like if you
have statically assigned PPPoE IPs that aren't in the main pool), which is
what I do (although I distribute the PPPoE IPs via iBGP instead of OSPF,
bu
If you redistribute connected routes on a PPPoE server you get a route
for every /32 and that's undesirable.
My solution currently is to NOT redistribute connected and instead just
advertise the larger network which will encompass all the /32's.
I read a presentation suggesting to use an OSPF
11 matches
Mail list logo
