summarization

I would like to summarize the following Ip . I came up w/

172.16.8.0/21 for .8 to .15 and 172.16.16.0/22 for .16 to .19... is that correct ?

We are using /24

172.16.8.0
172.16.9.0
172.16.10.0
172.16.11.0
172.16.12.0
172.16.13.0
172.16.14.0
172.16.15.0
172.16.16.0
172.16.17.0
172.16.18.0
172.16.19.0

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

ziggi138

You could do it that way, but if it were me, i would summarize the 172.16.8.0-172.16.15.0 networks, then just have separate network statements for the remaining 4 networks.

xzyan

gotcha , as long as it is correct I am ok ..good suggestion Thank u

Forsaken_GA

ziggi138 wrote: »

You could do it that way, but if it were me, i would summarize the 172.16.8.0-172.16.15.0 networks, then just have separate network statements for the remaining 4 networks.

Do you mind if I ask why? There are occasionally good reasons to not summarize, but in most cases, why would you want to propagate 4 routes when 1 would do, especially when you're already summarizing the rest of the allocation?