Why would you want two different DMVPN networks going to the same hub then have them in the same OSPF process? Thanks


  • JoeMJoeM ✭✭✭

    Hi Kryolla,

    I am not sure that there is a benefit for this, or that is more than an easy lab setup to practice the differences with multiple DMVPN tunnels. It is an exercise in how to separate DMVPN tunnels.   OSPF is just a routing protocol. You can do with it as you wish, as long as it has neighbors.

    This multiple DMVPN tunnel knowledge will come in handy, especially when using dual-hub configurations also.

    For example,  Tunnel Keys are not mandatory on single connections, whereas Network-ID's are always needed.  But as soon as more DMVPN tunnels are needed, different local network-ids and mutal tunnel-keys are needed.

    It gets more fun when sharing IPSec configs between tunnels.  Keep on practicing. Hope this helps.  ;-)


  • JoeMJoeM ✭✭✭

    ....going to the same hub then have them in the same OSPF process?....

    Bonus - mixing technologies here.  ;-)   I was studying this weekend, and I came across an interesting command that I had forgotten about.

        interface X/Y   
            ip ospf database-filter all out


    Where would we use a command like this?  After all, all ospf databases in an Area should match for that area, correct? If this command was used on a neighbor connection, then the neighbor would depend on getting the information from a different source.

    Dual connections like this could be a good place -- especially with low-speed connections. 


    Cisco OSPF Command and Configuration Handbook - by William R. Parkhurst




    Just something to think about. Layering technologies.

     Hope this helps you expand on your question.  Cheers!







Sign In or Register to comment.