I found my answer, and then neglected to continue this thread. In short with OSPFv3 the interface costs will not matter, nor will how you advertise, type 1 or type 2. OSPFv3 will prefer the non backbone area learned routes, ie keeping area 1 traffic on area 1, rather than traversing the backbone. This maybe over simplifying the explanaition,.
Cause
Intra-area non Backbone area paths are preferred over Intra-area Backbone aera Paths. This is as per RFC 2328.
As for how to do what Thomas and I discussed: the prefix list complicates the issue, but I needed it for my lab environment.
ip prefix-list Static_Routes seq 10 permit 10.9.169.0/24
ip prefix-list Static_Routes seq 50 deny 0.0.0.0/0
route-map testroutes permit seq 20
match ip address prefix-list Static_Routes
set metric-type external type-1
!
router ospf 1
router-id 10.0.0.1
rfc1583-compatibility
redistribute static route-map testroutes
area 0.0.0.0
area 0.0.0.1
Original Message:
Sent: May 15, 2023 11:04 AM
From: thomasbnc
Subject: AOS-CX How do I redistribute static as a type 1 external instead of the default type 1?
Hi
You need route-maps to change the type of the OSPF route generated by the redistribution of static routes. However, if I'm not completely wrong, this has been introduced with 10.08.xxxx versions. Can you confirm that "redistribute static route-map XXXX" is not available in your software version?
The other question would be why you simply don't advertise/don't redistibute the route in question in area 1? Do you use any kind of summarization on the area border?
Please share a bit more information and/or a diagram of your situation in order to discuss the options available.
Regards,
Thomas
Original Message:
Sent: May 12, 2023 11:17 AM
From: marmckit
Subject: AOS-CX How do I redistribute static as a type 1 external instead of the default type 1?
How do I redistribute static as an OSF type 1 external instead of the default type 2?
I have an interim situation with 2 subnets on a single circuit. 1on area 1 and the other on Area0. We are migrating to Area0, but not all remote sites are off of area 1.
There is a second circuit and that is where I want to move atll the traffic to. The External routes remain on the area1 interface. Route selection seems to prefer the higher Area ID foir the external type 2 routes. All of the interfaces are costed to prefer the new area0 circuit and I can move the majority of traffic to this lowest cost circuit, except for the External type 2. If I redistribute as Type 1 than the route selection should utilize the interface costs. Can this be done on XL.10.06.0101?