Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. If you'd prefer to explore, try our test area to get started. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

ipv6 ospf and rip understaning the routing table

Hello,

I faced an issue that i dont understand the reason for it. A case study to practice the ospf and rip for ipv6 it contains two routers each with one loopback. 

when configuring ripng and ospf3 on both routers the loopbacks on both routers are in the routing table with two entries once with ripng (/64) and the other with osps3 (/128). I understand that the two entries must be in the routing table because the different prefix. The question here why rip sends (/64 preifx) while ospf sends (/128 prefix).

R4 table:

R   2011:5555::/64 [120/2]
     via FE80::C800:FF:FEDC:8, Serial1/1
O   2011:5555::1/128 [110/64]
     via FE80::C800:FF:FEDC:8, Serial1/1


R5 table:

R   2011:1111::/64 [120/2]
     via FE80::C803:1CFF:FE48:8, Serial1/1
O   2011:1111::1/128 [110/64]
     via FE80::C803:1CFF:FE48:8, Serial1/1


Thanks,

sincerely,

Hossam El-Din Roshdy

  • IPv6 Integration and Transition
Everyone's tags (1)
1 REPLY
New Member

  Hi  we can see from this is

 

 Hi

 

 we can see from this is that it is an IPV6 based configuration ,and these protocols must be on different subnet ,that's why you see /64 for RIP and /128 for OSPF.

 

 

114
Views
0
Helpful
1
Replies