From: Jason Gardiner (gardiner@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Dec 06 2001 - 13:53:48 GMT-3
Access-list? For ip, you could block UDP port 520. Not sure about IPX,
but I suspect that it would be similar.
Albert Lu wrote:
>
> Using the no network would lead to the network not being advertised. I still
> want the network to be advertised, but not to send rip/sap updates out that
> interface.
>
> Albert
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: routerkid [mailto:routerkid@adelphia.net]
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 8:54 AM
> To: Albert Lu; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Making IPX RIP passive on certain interfaces
>
> If you want to disable routing for the IPX network number:
> This is done at the process level... Use no network <ipx net #> under IPX
> ROUTER RIP. When you do a sho run the IPX routing process will appear with
> the negated network numbers..
>
> Hope this is what you were looking for...
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Albert Lu <albert_ccie@yahoo.com>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 5:06 PM
> Subject: Making IPX RIP passive on certain interfaces
>
> > Hello Group,
> >
> > Is it possible to make IPX RIP passive on interfaces like you can for IP
> > RIP? I remember that there is an interface command that would allow this,
> > rather than doing it through the routing process.
> >
> > Albert
> >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:32:39 GMT-3