Comments on: Redistribution problem http://www.networkingblog.in/redistribution-problem-855 Cisco Netpro Blog Wed, 23 Jun 2010 06:07:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: karan http://www.networkingblog.in/redistribution-problem-855/comment-page-1#comment-707 karan Wed, 03 Feb 2010 09:45:45 +0000 http://www.networkingblog.in/?p=855#comment-707 Hello, Jon is right the reason for the issues may be that you have a daisy chain topology and devices far from the redistributing device may consider some routes as useless. if so this means that your network is almost too big for RIP. to be noted that Ripv2 has improvements but not on this aspect. Hello,

Jon is right the reason for the issues may be that you have a daisy chain topology and devices far from the redistributing device may consider some routes as useless.

if so this means that your network is almost too big for RIP.

to be noted that Ripv2 has improvements but not on this aspect.

]]> By: arul http://www.networkingblog.in/redistribution-problem-855/comment-page-1#comment-706 arul Wed, 03 Feb 2010 09:45:27 +0000 http://www.networkingblog.in/?p=855#comment-706 For RIP the metric is hop count so that is what you were specifying. Each time a the traffic goes through a router the hop count is incremented by 1. A hop count of 16 is considered an unreachable network ie. you can't have a route with more than 15 hops. So it may be that by using 2 you actually managed to get to a hop count of 16 for some of the routes thus making them unreachable. This is one of the reason why RIP is only suited to very small networks. For RIP the metric is hop count so that is what you were specifying. Each time a the traffic goes through a router the hop count is incremented by 1. A hop count of 16 is considered an unreachable network ie. you can’t have a route with more than 15 hops. So it may be that by using 2 you actually managed to get to a hop count of 16 for some of the routes thus making them unreachable.

This is one of the reason why RIP is only suited to very small networks.

]]>