From: Jason Gardiner (gardiner@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Oct 29 2001 - 11:26:32 GMT-3
Have you tried an ACL that blocks the EIGRP on the Serial interfaces?
access-list 101 deny eigrp any any
or the multicasts
access-list 101 deny ip any host 224.0.0.10
although, does that work with multicasts? I'll have to check.
Thanks,
Jason Gardiner
Supervisor, Engineering Services
Sprint <Insert Division Name>
"You can swim all day in the Sea of Knowledge and
still come out completely dry. Most people do."
- Norton Juster
On Sun, 28 Oct 2001, Brian Hescock wrote:
> David and I have been discussing it off-line and we haven't found a way
> to do it in earlier code (i.e no wildcard bits for eigrp).
> Passive-interface won't work, it prevents advertisement of updates out
> that interface but you still have that network added to eigrp topology
> table and would advertise it out any other eigrp interfaces that you
> didn't put passive-int on. Configuring "network 10.0.0.0" under router
> eigrp turns on eigrp on all interfaces with 10.x.x.x and places it in
> the eigrp topology table. It would then be known as an internal eigrp
> route, admin distance 90. The ospf route would be redistributed and
> would be an external eigrp route, admin distance 170. So somehow you
> would have to make the route learned via ospf a lower admin distance or
> an equal admin distance and tweak the metrics when it's redistributed.
> Perhaps there's a hack to do it I hadn't thought of but I looked at all
> available commands in a route-map and haven't come across anything.
> Note: the ospf route isn't learned via ospf, it's a directly
> connected network on the router.
>
> Brian
>
> routerjocky wrote:
>
> >just off the top of my head, passive interfaces in conjunction with no
> >auto-summary on eigrp should probably work, because of the way passive
> >interface works with eigrp (turns off the routing protocol on those
> >interfaces)
> >
> >-e-
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "David Knot" <david_knot@yahoo.com>
> >To: "Brian Hescock" <bhescock@cisco.com>
> >Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2001 3:09 PM
> >Subject: Re: OSPF <-> EIGRP Redistribution
> >
> >
> >>Brian
> >>
> >>Agree that passive-interface won't work!
> >>
> >>I've tried distance command on Router A but since the
> >>route is directly connected one, it doesn't sort it
> >>out.
> >>
> >>Thanks
> >>
> >>--- Brian Hescock <bhescock@cisco.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>David,
> >>> The response someone gave you with
> >>>passive-interface won't work but
> >>>what should work (if you have older code) is use the
> >>>"distance" command
> >>>to set the admin distance higher so the ospf route
> >>>is preferred.
> >>> You''ll still have the route in the eigrp topology
> >>>table but it won't
> >>>be in the routing table.
> >>>
> >>>Brian
> >>>
> >>>David Knot wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Hi guys
> >>>>
> >>>>Can someone help with this OSPF <-> EIGRP
> >>>>redistribution lab exercise.
> >>>>
> >>>>Router B has 2 serial 0, serial 1 & Ethernet 0
> >>>>interfaces. The serials are running OSPF on them &
> >>>>they lead to OSPF IP cloud. The e0 is running EIGRP
> >>>>
> >>>on
> >>>
> >>>>it & they leads to EIGRP IP cloud. All IP subnet
> >>>>addresses have prefix of 180.99.X.X.
> >>>>
> >>>>The problem is when EIGRP is configured it grapes
> >>>>
> >>>all
> >>>
> >>>>180.99.X.X interfaces (including the s0 & s1 IP
> >>>>subnets) & sends them out. The requirement is to
> >>>>
> >>>have
> >>>
> >>>>OSPF on 2 serials ONLY (this is easy since OSPF
> >>>>network command is granular) & EIGRP is to run on
> >>>>
> >>>e0
> >>>
> >>>>ONLY (this is where I need help since EIGRP network
> >>>>command is NOT granular). I tried a distribute list
> >>>>(distribute-list 99 out e0 with ACL denying the 2
> >>>>serial subnets). But this stops OSPF to EIGRP
> >>>>redistribution of these 2 subnets.
> >>>>
> >>>>Help please!
> >>>>
> >>>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 20 2002 - 22:33:27 GMT-3