advertising peer PPP addresses

[Timur Irmatov]

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 2:57 AM, Ondrej Zajicek <santiago at crfreenet.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 04:41:20PM +0500, Timur Irmatov wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Ondrej Zajicek <santiago at crfreenet.org> wrote:
>> > Another way is to anounce them as 'remote pool' together as a prefix
>> > (if they are).
>>
>> Could you please elaborate?
>
> If the other ends of PPP links have addresses that could be propagated
> together as one (or several) prefix, just propagate that prefix and
> not the individual addresses.

Yes, that is exactly what we are doing. We are achieving this by
routing this pool as 'blackhole' in protocol static and then export to
ospf. But we have several routers that act as PPPoE servers, and also
we have some clients with static IP addresses. Because they can
connect to any of those routers, we need to route their /32 addresses
separately.

>> >> Also, what is the best way to advertise local pool for those PPP
>> >> interfaces? One that I see is:
>> >>
>> >> protocol static {
>> >>         export none;
>> >>       import all;
>> >>         route 192.168.134/24 drop;
>> >> };
>> >
>> > That is a good idea, another way is to use 'stubnet 192.168.134/24;'
>> > in ospf area.
>>
>> May be I am misunderstanding something, but adding (just for test)
>> 'stubnet 10.255.255.0/24' does not make that network known to other
>> neighboring routers.
>
> It should. Does it show as stubnet in 'show ospf state' ?

Uhm. My bad. Indeed, it is shown in output of 'show ospf state'. Also,
neibouring Cisco does know about that network, don't know how I missed
that earlier. I'll switch to using stubnet for my remote pools.

Thank you very much!


-- 
Timur Irmatov, xmpp:irmatov at jabber.ru