Hey all, I'm having a weird OSPF issue with a particular network I'm working on. Pretty simple setup, 4 locations, 4 x 2911 routers connected via Metro E and all advertise a default route. All 4 sites have another router behind the 2911s. Main site is at 10.89.228.1 so I want it to be the default route. However, for all locations all the internal routers do not pick up 10.89.229.40 as the default. Instead the pick the router that's internal 4 routers: SITE A-  10.89.228.40 **MAIN** SITE B- 10.89.229.40  (here's where all the output below is from) SITE C- 10.88.7.40 SITE D- 10.88.6.40 internal routers are at .40 at all locations Now two questions... A. I thought that E2 routes are always prefered over E1 routes.. this is not what I'm seeing here: see exhibit A B. I thought that the default route with the lowest metric would be in the routing table - this is not what I'm seeing here either see exhibit B. The output below comes from the internal router behind SITE B. So it has an ip address that's in the same LAN... 10.89.229.0/24 EXHIBIT A -- All default routes are advertized as type 1  -- Main site is advertizing an type 2 default route: #sh ip os da ex 0.0.0.0 | i Metric|Adv|Typ                 Type-5 AS External Link States   LS Type: AS External Link   Advertising Router: 10.88.6.40         Metric Type: 1 (Comparable directly to link state metric)         Metric: 10   LS Type: AS External Link   Advertising Router: 10.88.7.40         Metric Type: 1 (Comparable directly to link state metric)         Metric: 8   LS Type: AS External Link   Advertising Router: 10.89.228.40         Metric Type: 2 (Larger than any link state path)         Metric: 5   LS Type: AS External Link   **THIS GETS IN THE ROUTING TABLE EVEN THOUGH METRIC TYPE ABOVE IS 2*   Advertising Router: 10.89.229.40         Metric Type: 1 (Comparable directly to link state metric)         Metric: 10 EXHIBIT B --- All default routes are type 1 -- MAIN SITE HAS THE LOWEST METRIC #sh ip os da ex 0.0.0.0 | i Ty|Ad|c:                 Type-5 AS External Link States   LS Type: AS External Link   Advertising Router: 10.88.6.40         Metric Type: 1 (Comparable directly to link state metric)         Metric: 10         Forward Address: 0.0.0.0   LS Type: AS External Link   Advertising Router: 10.88.7.40         Metric Type: 1 (Comparable directly to link state metric)         Metric: 8         Forward Address: 0.0.0.0   LS Type: AS External Link   Advertising Router: 10.89.228.40         Metric Type: 1 (Comparable directly to link state metric)         Metric: 5         Forward Address: 0.0.0.0   LS Type: AS External Link   Advertising Router: 10.89.229.40 **THIS GETS IN THE ROUTING TABLE EVEN THOUGH 10>5**         Metric Type: 1 (Comparable directly to link state metric)         Metric: 10          Forward Address: 0.0.0.0 What am I missing? I thought I knew OSPF pretty well.. I guess I was mistaken. thank you! PS: I did clear ospf processes every time I was making changes.. ... View more

Hi all, I'm having a purely theoretical problem where I have two devices both injecting an def. route in the OSPF domain and I'm trying to figure out what forces the election of one as a candidate default over the other. So I have 3 devices all on the same LAN 10.89.228.0/24 Dev 1 (firewall): ip: 10.89.228.40/24 router-id -same as ip advertises 0.0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 with metric 10 Dev 2 (router) ip: 10.89.228.1/24 router id: 192.168.100.1 advertises 0.0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 with metric 1 Dev 3 (router) ip: 10.89.228.252/24 router id 172.16.100.1 receives default route of 10.89.228.40 NOT 10.89.228.1 Any ideas why this is happening? I'm scratching my head!! CONFIGS: Dev 2 router ospf 1 router-id 192.168.100.1 area 0 authentication message-digest network 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 area 0 default-information originate metric 1 ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.89.228.40 Dev 3 router ospf 1 log-adjacency-changes network 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 area 0 #sh ip ospf data external 0.0.0.0 SHOW COMMANDS ON DEV3: #sh ip ospf data external 0.0.0.0 adv-router 192.168.100.1             OSPF Router with ID (172.16.100.1) (Process ID 1)                 Type-5 AS External Link States   Routing Bit Set on this LSA in topology Base with MTID 0   LS age: 274   Options: (No TOS-capability, DC)   LS Type: AS External Link   Link State ID: 0.0.0.0 (External Network Number )   Advertising Router: 192.168.100.1   LS Seq Number: 80000001   Checksum: 0xDA98   Length: 36   Network Mask: /0         Metric Type: 2 (Larger than any link state path)         MTID: 0         Metric: 1         Forward Address: 10.89.228.40         External Route Tag: 1 #sh ip ospf data external 0.0.0.0 adv-router 10.89.228.40             OSPF Router with ID (172.16.100.1) (Process ID 1)                 Type-5 AS External Link States   LS age: 1664   Options: (No TOS-capability, No DC)   LS Type: AS External Link   Link State ID: 0.0.0.0 (External Network Number )   Advertising Router: 10.89.228.40   LS Seq Number: 8000001F   Checksum: 0xB287   Length: 36   Network Mask: /0         Metric Type: 2 (Larger than any link state path)         MTID: 0         Metric: 10         Forward Address: 0.0.0.0         External Route Tag: 0 #sh ip route 0.0.0.0 Routing entry for 0.0.0.0/0, supernet   Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 1, candidate default path   Tag 1, type extern 2, forward metric 1   Last update from 10.89.228.40 on GigabitEthernet0/0, 00:09:26 ago   Routing Descriptor Blocks:   * 10.89.228.40, from 192.168.100.1, 00:09:26 ago, via GigabitEthernet0/0       Route metric is 1, traffic share count is 1       Route tag 1 Shouldn't the .252 (dev3) be getting the default route with the lowest metric? Why is it picking .40 as default route even though it clearly says metric 10 (vs metric 1) ? I'm scratching my head!! ... View more

Hi all, I wanted to ask if any of you have real world numbers on the GETVPN performance with 2911 routers? I have a pretty simple setup with 2 key servers - 4 group members. I connected 2 laptops on two different group members and did an iperf test. Unfortunately the results were pretty disheartening. I only got 66-67Mbps/sec max and the router CPU was constantly at 77% !! All the routers were 2911 with 2gigs of RAM installed and I was using AES 256 for the traffic. (I don't think lowering to 128 bits would give me that much of a performance boost). I wish we could afford ASRs but we can't so I would love to hear other people's experience on this with real world results with similar platforms. thank you - ... View more

Hi all, This is an easy question for all the architechs and designers out there. I have a stack of 3 508-XL switches and one of them failed. Thankfully we have 2 spares but hese are more than 10 years old and have reaced EoL. What is the equivalent switch of a 3508-xl replacement today? thank you, ... View more