Intra-area routes are preferred over inter-area or external routes regardless of their cost; see Section 16.2 paragraph (6) of the OSPF RFC.
Inter-area routes are preferred over external routes; see Section 16.2 paragraph (5) of the OSPF RFC.
E1 routes are preferred over E2 routes; see Section 16.4 paragraph (6) of the OSPF RFC.
When comparing E1 routes, the route metric is the external cost added to the internal cost; see Section 16.4 paragraph (6.d) of the OSPF RFC.
The internal cost of an E1/E2 route is the cost between the current router and the forwarding address specified in the Type-5 LSA (or originating ASBR if the forwarding address is set to 0.0.0.0); see Section 16.4 paragraph (3) of the OSPF RFC.
When comparing E2 routes, only the external costs are compared; see Section 16.4 paragraph (6.b) of the OSPF RFC.
If multiple E2 routes have the same external cost, the internal cost (as above) is compared; see Section 16.4 paragraph (6.d) of the OSPF RFC.
Inter-area routes are preferred over external routes; see Section 16.2 paragraph (5) of the OSPF RFC.
E1 routes are preferred over E2 routes; see Section 16.4 paragraph (6) of the OSPF RFC.
When comparing E1 routes, the route metric is the external cost added to the internal cost; see Section 16.4 paragraph (6.d) of the OSPF RFC.
The internal cost of an E1/E2 route is the cost between the current router and the forwarding address specified in the Type-5 LSA (or originating ASBR if the forwarding address is set to 0.0.0.0); see Section 16.4 paragraph (3) of the OSPF RFC.
When comparing E2 routes, only the external costs are compared; see Section 16.4 paragraph (6.b) of the OSPF RFC.
If multiple E2 routes have the same external cost, the internal cost (as above) is compared; see Section 16.4 paragraph (6.d) of the OSPF RFC.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment