distribute list（分配列表），配置中以紫色字体标识，用于路由过滤，用于DV routing protocol，或者是以路由条目明文作为路由信息的协议。比如RIP，EIGRP，OSPF的ABR（OSPF区域间路由类似于DV的原理），或者ASBR中的重分配。因为分配列表的作用就是过滤路由更新包（update packets）里面的具体条目，让目的路由器不了解该路由，所以若该更新包若不是以通告路由为目的的话，就失去了分配列表的作用。正如网上很多前辈所指出的，在LS routing protocol里，由于LSA（ISIS称为LSP）通告的是链路的状态，需要在整个area里同步，某一条链路要么为失效，要么为生效，不可能出现某台路由器知道，而另一台路由器不知道的情况。可以说，分配列表是利用了DV routing protocol的缺陷对目标路由器进行“欺骗”，对LS routing protocol不管用。

 
下面通过实验分析distribute-list的特性。
R1(S1/1)--(S1/0)R2(S1/1)--(S1/0)R3(S1/1)--(S1/0)R4
其中R1连接网段192.168.0.0，192.168.1.0，192.168.2.0，192.168.3.0，R4连接10.2.0.0，10.2.1.0，10.2.2.0，10.2.3.0。
 
R1#show run
interface Loopback0
 ip address 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0
!
interface Loopback1
 ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
!
interface Loopback2
 ip address 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.0
!
interface Loopback3
 ip address 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.0
!
interface Serial1/1
 description DCE,EIGRP 10,connected to R2's S1/0,ip 10.1.1.2/30
 ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.252
 clock rate 9600
!
router eigrp 10
 network 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.3
 network 192.168.0.0 0.0.3.255
 no auto-summary
!
/////
 
R2#show run
interface Serial1/0
 description DTE,EIGRP 10,connected to R1's S1/1,ip 10.1.1.1/30
 ip address 10.1.1.2 255.255.255.252
!
interface Serial1/1
 description DCE,OSPF area 0,connected to R3's S1/0,ip 10.1.1.6/30
 ip address 10.1.1.5 255.255.255.252
 clock rate 9600
!
router eigrp 10
 redistribute ospf 100 metric 200 100 0 1 1500
 network 10.1.1.0 0.0.0.3
 no auto-summary
!
router ospf 100
 router-id 2.2.2.2
 redistribute eigrp 10 metric 20 metric-type 1 subnets
 network 10.1.1.4 0.0.0.3 area 0
  distribute-list 1 out eigrp 10
!
access-list 1 deny   192.168.0.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 1 deny   192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 1 deny   192.168.2.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 1 permit any
!
/////
 
R3#show run
interface Serial1/0
 description DTE,OSPF area 0,connected to R2's S1/1,ip 10.1.1.5/30
 ip address 10.1.1.6 255.255.255.252
!         
interface Serial1/1
 description DCE,OSPF area 0,connected to R4's S1/0,ip 172.16.1.2/24
 ip address 172.16.1.1 255.255.255.0
 clock rate 9600
!
router ospf 100
 router-id 3.3.3.3
 network 10.1.1.4 0.0.0.3 area 0
 network 172.16.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
 distribute-list 10 in
!
access-list 10 deny   10.2.0.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 10 deny   10.2.1.0 0.0.0.255
access-list 10 permit any
!
/////
 
R4#show run
interface Loopback0
 ip address 10.2.0.1 255.255.255.0
!
interface Loopback1
 ip address 10.2.1.1 255.255.255.0
!
interface Loopback2
 ip address 10.2.2.1 255.255.255.0
!
interface Loopback3
 ip address 10.2.3.1 255.255.255.0
!
interface Serial1/0
 description DTE,OSPF area 0,connected to R3's S1/1,ip 172.16.1.1/24
 ip address 172.16.1.2 255.255.255.0
!
router ospf 100
 router-id 4.4.4.4
 network 10.2.0.0 0.0.3.255 area 0
 network 172.16.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
!
/////
 
察看R1的路由表
R1#show ip route
     172.16.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
D EX    172.16.1.0 [170/13337600] via 10.1.1.2, 00:23:50, Serial1/1
     10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 6 subnets, 2 masks
D EX    10.2.1.1/32 [170/13337600] via 10.1.1.2, 00:14:04, Serial1/1
D EX    10.2.0.1/32 [170/13337600] via 10.1.1.2, 00:14:04, Serial1/1
D EX    10.2.3.1/32 [170/13337600] via 10.1.1.2, 00:14:04, Serial1/1
C       10.1.1.0/30 is directly connected, Serial1/1
D EX    10.2.2.1/32 [170/13337600] via 10.1.1.2, 00:14:04, Serial1/1
D EX    10.1.1.4/30 [170/13337600] via 10.1.1.2, 00:24:56, Serial1/1
C    192.168.0.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback0
C    192.168.1.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback1
C    192.168.2.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback2
C    192.168.3.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback3
还有R4的
R4#show ip route
     172.16.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C       172.16.1.0 is directly connected, Serial1/0
     10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 6 subnets, 2 masks
C       10.2.0.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback0
C       10.2.1.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback1
C       10.2.2.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback2
O E1    10.1.1.0/30 [110/148] via 172.16.1.1, 00:14:56, Serial1/0
C       10.2.3.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback3
O       10.1.1.4/30 [110/128] via 172.16.1.1, 00:14:56, Serial1/0
O E1 192.168.3.0/24 [110/148] via 172.16.1.1, 00:14:56, Serial1/0
明显的R4的路由表中，没有了R2的distribute-list中指明的路由；但是R1中还是有R3的distribute-list中指明的路由。
 
难道说distribute-list根本没有作用？
R1#ping 10.2.1.1
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.2.1.1, timeout is 2 seconds:
U.U.U      //目标不可达
Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)
 
看看根源
R3# show ip route
     172.16.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C       172.16.1.0 is directly connected, Serial1/1
     10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 4 subnets, 2 masks
O       10.2.3.1/32 [110/65] via 172.16.1.2, 00:20:15, Serial1/1
O E1    10.1.1.0/30 [110/84] via 10.1.1.5, 00:20:15, Serial1/0
O       10.2.2.1/32 [110/65] via 172.16.1.2, 00:20:15, Serial1/1
C       10.1.1.4/30 is directly connected, Serial1/0
O E1 192.168.3.0/24 [110/84] via 10.1.1.5, 00:20:15, Serial1/0
 
R3#show ip ospf data router 4.4.4.4
--output omitted--
    Link connected to: a Stub Network
     (Link ID) Network/subnet number: 10.2.1.1
     (Link Data) Network Mask: 255.255.255.255
      Number of TOS metrics: 0
       TOS 0 Metrics: 1
    Link connected to: a Stub Network
     (Link ID) Network/subnet number: 10.2.0.1
     (Link Data) Network Mask: 255.255.255.255
      Number of TOS metrics: 0
       TOS 0 Metrics: 1

--output omitted--

 
原因在哪？上面引用IOS reference的片段已经说明了。OSPF中，distribute-list仅仅把所在路由器上的路由表中相关条目去掉，并不影响链路状态的收敛。从R3的数据库中可以看出，R3的OSPF数据库里有这两条路由的数据，只有路由表没有。导致的结果是，整个OSPF area0 都知道该链路是生效的，就只有R3“不知道”该链路；而R3又正好是通往该目的地得唯一路径。因此R1发往R4的路由包只好被R3的ICMP返回“目标不可达”。同时，R3的路由表与其数据库不同步。证明了分配列表直接作用在了路由表上。