cja@flamingo.nersc.gov (Cathy Aronson) (10/03/90)
From cja Tue Oct 2 12:22:04 1990
To: cja@flamingo.nersc.gov, vaf@Valinor.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Static Subnet Defaults..
Status: R
I have seen that problem too, Vince. I have seen a route known
via RIP (has a RIP metric, and distance when I do a show route),
but it says that it is known via IGRP.
---Cathy
>From vaf@Valinor.Stanford.EDU Mon Oct 1 21:34:51 1990
Return-Path: <vaf@Valinor.Stanford.EDU>
Received: from Valinor.Stanford.EDU by flamingo.nersc.gov (4.1/SMI-4.0)
id AA12412; Mon, 1 Oct 90 21:34:50 PDT
Received: by Valinor.Stanford.EDU (5.61/inc-1.0)
id AA09640; Mon, 1 Oct 90 21:37:49 -0700
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 1990 21:37:48 PDT
From: Vince Fuller <vaf@Valinor.Stanford.EDU>
To: cja@flamingo.nersc.gov (Cathy Aronson)
Cc: cisco@spot.Colorado.EDU
Office: Pine Hall 167, (415) 723-6860
Subject: Re: Static Subnet Defaults..
In-Reply-To: Your message of Sun, 30 Sep 90 17:32:20 PDT
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.654842268.vaf@Valinor.Stanford.EDU>
Status: RO
Actually, there would appear to be a much more general problem that under
8.1 the router becomes very confused over which routing process is the source
of a route (at least according to "show route xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx". It does seem
to get correct metric information, etc., but seems to frequently tag routes
with the wrong protocol instance.
--Vince