RE: IGRP Issues

From: jbazar (jbazar@xxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Jan 25 2000 - 14:48:06 GMT-3


   
   Ben,
   
   1st Question
   
   Passive interface just prevents the router from sending advertisements
   out a particular interface. This is from the Command Reference
   Manual.
   
   Usage Guidelines
   
   This command first appeared in Cisco IOS Release 10.0.
   
   If you disable the sending of routing updates on an interface, the
   particular subnet will continue to be advertised to other interfaces,
   and updates from other routers on that interface continue to be
   received and processed.
   
   2nd Question
   
   Look up this subject header in the Archives. There was a long
   discussion about this:
   
   subject: VLSM ---> FLSM or OSPF --> IGRP
   
   jeff
   
   -----Original Message-----
   From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
   Ben Rife
   Sent: Monday, January 24, 2000 11:17 PM
   To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
   Subject: IGRP Issues
   
   Hi Everyone,
   
   1st Question:
   
   I have two routers R2 and R3
   
   R2----------R3
   
   R2 has 3 interfaces:
   Lo0: 129.45.80.72 /30
   E0 : 129.45.80.144 /29
   S0 : 129.45.80.4 /30
   
   router igrp 100
   net 129.45.0.0
   passive-interface lo 0
   
   
   R3 has 3 interfaces:
   S0 : 129.45.80.4 /30
   E0 : 129.45.80.48 /30
   S1 : 129.45.80.128 /29
   
   router igrp 100
   net 129.45.0.0
   passive-interface e0
   passive-interface s1
   
   On R3, when I "sh ip route", I see R2's loopback in my table. Why? I
   thought by "passive-int lo 0", I wouldn't see it?
   
   
   2nd Question:
   
   If I run OSPF on R3's S1 interface, will I be able to redistribute
   that into IGRP since it is a /29 ?
   
   Please explain, it's been a long day and I'm not thinking straight.
   
   Thanks,
   Ben



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:22:45 GMT-3