From: Allyn Baskerville (abaskerville@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Jan 30 2001 - 11:51:28 GMT-3
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that passive interfaces for
EIGRP prevents a neighbor relationship from even forming. This will prevent
the router from receiving any updates from this interface. Allyn
-----Original Message-----
From: Feliz, Edgar [mailto:Edgar.Feliz@BTNA.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 8:07 AM
To: CCIE yong; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: cciebootcamp lab #2
On this scenario you are doing mutual redistribution between EIGRP/OSPF. In
this case you only want OSPF to advertise the 10.10.X.X networks, and EIGRP
to advertise the 10.20.X.X network, but since EIGRP defaults to a classfull
network statement you have to specified passive-interface e0, and S0.2 under
EIGRP. You do not have to do that with OSPF because under OSPF when you use
the network statement you specify a mask with which you exclude unwanted
networks.
Passive-interface cause the interface to received updates but will not
forward updates. I just finished this lab for the unteenth time it is a nice
simple redistribution, and BGP lab.
example
router OSPF 2
Network 10.10.0.0 0.0.255.255 are 0
router EIGRP 2
network 10.0.0.0
passive-interface E0
passive-interface S0
-----Original Message-----
From: CCIE yong [mailto:ccie_yong@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 7:01 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: cciebootcamp lab #2
Hi,
The lab 2, section2 , task 3, point number 10, is there any mistake?
bacause the solution seems to block e0 and s0.2 for eigrp instead of the
question asked to "only listen to EIGRP update on e0 and s0.2"
Correct me if I'm wrong .
regards
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:48 GMT-3