37. Two-point and two-way redistribution of redistribution configuration experiment
1. Experimental topology
2. Basic configuration
R1 configurations
interface Serial0/0
ip address 14.1.1.1 255.255.255.0
interface Serial0/1
ip address 13.1.1.1 255.255.255.0
R2 configuration
interface Serial0/0
ip address 24.1.1.2 255.255.255.0
interface Serial0/1
ip address 23.1.1.2 255.255.255.0
R3 configuration
interface Loopback0
ip address 3.3.3.3 255.255.255.0
interface Serial0/0
ip address 13.1.1.3 255.255.255.0
interface Serial0/1
ip address 23.1.1.3 255.255.255.0
R4 configuration
interface Loopback0
ip address 4.4.4.4 255.255.255.0
interface Serial0/0
ip address 14.1.1.4 255.255.255.0
interface Serial0/1
ip address 24.1.1.4 255.255.255.0
RIP and OSPF bidirectional redistribution (problematic)
R1 configurations
router ospf 110
router-id 1.1.1.1
redistribute rip subnets
network 13.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
router rip
version 2
redistribute ospf 110 metric 1
network 14.0.0.0
no auto-summary
R2 configuration
router ospf 110
router-id 2.2.2.2
redistribute rip subnets
network 23.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
router rip
version 2
redistribute ospf 110 metric 1
network 24.0.0.0
no auto-summary
R3 configuration
router ospf 110
router-id 3.3.3.3
network 3.3.3.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
network 13.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
network 23.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
R4 configuration
router rip
version 2
network 4.0.0.0
network 14.0.0.0
network 24.0.0.0
no auto-summary
At this point, we found that both R1 and R2 have abnormal routes, mainly due to AD values.
For example, R1 learned routes 4.4.4.0/24 and 24.1.1.0/24 from both RIP and OSPF. It is reasonable to choose the route learned from RIP, but because OSPF AD is smaller than RIP, all R1s prefer the route learned from OSPF. All you have to do is change the AD of RIP redistributed into OSPF to greater than 120 to resolve the problem.
R1 configurations
router ospf 110
distance 121 2.2.2.2 0.0.0.0
R2 configuration
router ospf 110
distance 121 1.1.1.1 0.0.0.0
It was followed by RID.
RIP and EIGRP bidirectional redistribution (no problem)
R1 configurations
router eigrp 90
redistribute rip metric 1500 100 255 1 1500
network 13.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
auto-summary
router rip
version 2
redistribute eigrp 90 metric 1
network 14.0.0.0
no auto-summary
R2 configuration
router eigrp 90
redistribute rip metric 1500 100 255 1 1500
network 23.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
no auto-summary
router rip
version 2
redistribute eigrp 90 metric 1
network 24.0.0.0
no auto-summary
R3 configuration
router eigrp 90
network 3.3.3.0 0.0.0.255
network 13.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
network 23.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
no auto-summary
R4 configuration
router rip
version 2
network 4.0.0.0
network 14.0.0.0
network 24.0.0.0
no auto-summary
5. OSPF and EIGRP bi-directional redistribution (no problem)
R1 configurations
router eigrp 90
redistribute ospf 110 metric 1500 100 255 1 1500
network 13.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
auto-summary
router ospf 110
router-id 1.1.1.1
redistribute eigrp 90 subnets
network 14.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
R2 configuration
router eigrp 90
redistribute ospf 110 metric 1500 100 255 1 1500
network 23.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
no auto-summary
router ospf 110
router-id 2.2.2.2
redistribute eigrp 90 subnets
network 24.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
R3 configuration
router eigrp 90
network 3.3.3.0 0.0.0.255
network 13.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
network 23.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
no auto-summary
R4 configuration
router ospf 110
router-id 4.4.4.4
network 4.4.4.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
network 14.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
network 24.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
It can be seen that there is no problem with EIGRP and RIP or OSPF bi-directional redistribution, and there is bi-directional redistribution before RIP and OSPF.
