Subrat,

Subrat Mohanty wrote:

>
>
> Sina, Vishwas, Schhrre, Siva!Thanks a lot for helping me out.Sina!I
> have a couple more doubt. A1 A2
> A3----------R1-----------R2---------- N1 N2 N31.
> R1 is in A1 and A2 and R2 is in A2 and A3. So both of them are ABR.
> But none of them are connected to BB Area. As u said ABR will consider
> the Summary Lsa only from BB, does it mean that R1 will not have the
> info about N3 and R2 about N1? ( I thought R2 will be summerising A2
> about N3 and R1 will be having the info about N3).
>
>
>
> when R2 send a summary LSA for N3 to the area 2, R1 will ignore it and
> will not install it in the routing table and will not generate a
> summary for N3 into R1
> so the connectivity between A1 and A3 is broken however A1-A2 and
> A2-A3 will have connectivity
> note that the internal non-ABR routers in area 2 consider the summary
> for A3 generated by R2 but not the ABR ( R1 )
>
>
>
> 2. I am able to configure virtual link between R1 and R2 without
> having an interface(neither R1 nor R2) connected to BB Area (Checked
> with Cisco also). For configuring a virtual link between R1 and R2,
> don't we require one of the 2 routers to be connected to BB area ? I
> believe that a router will be connected to BB area only if one of the
> interface lies in BB or a Virtual link is established with a remote
> router, where the remote router is connected to BB. Pl. let me know if
> I am wrong any where.
>
>
>
> the requirement for virtual link is 2 ABR having in common a non
> backbone area ( Transit Area), so R1 and R2 are ABR and have area 2 in
> common
> there is no requirement for the BB connectivity and in your example
> you have a pure virtual backbone
>
>
> Sina
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards Subrat

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]