Re: EIGRP summmary-address route

From: Joe Jia (ellenjjl@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Mar 21 2002 - 20:38:37 GMT-3


   
Hi, the configurations as followings:

Earhart:

int ethernet0
 ip add 172.20.10.1 255.255.255.0
 ip summary-address eigrp 15 172.20.15.0 255.255.255.0

interface s0/0
  ip add 172.20.15.1 255.255.255.252

interface s0/1
  ip add 172.20.15.5 255.255.255.252

router eigrp 15
  passive-interface ethernet0 ****(Should be removed)
  network 172.20.0.0

router igrp 15
  passive-interface s0/0
  passive-interface s0/1
 network 172.20.0.0

Curtiss:

interface ethernet1
  ip add 172.20.10.2 255.255.255.0

interface ethernet0
  ip add 172.25.25.1 255.255.255.240

router igrp 15
  network 172.25.0.0
  network 172.20.0.0

Cochran:

interface s0/0
  ip add 172.20.15.6 255.255.255.252

interface ethernet 0
 ip add 192.168.17.1 255.255.255.0

router eigrp 15
 network 172.20.0.0
network 192.168.17.0

Lindbergh:

interface s0/1
 ip add 172.20.15.2 255.255.255.252

int loop1
ip add 192.168.16.1 255.255.255.0

router eigrp 15
  network 172.20.0.0
 network 192.168.16.0

----- Original Message -----
From: "Erick B." <erickbe@yahoo.com>
To: "Joe Jia" <ellenjjl@rogers.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: EIGRP summmary-address route

> Are you also running IGRP? According to the book it is
> a EIGRP / IGRP scenario. Can you post your cfg's?
>
>
> --- Joe Jia <ellenjjl@rogers.com> wrote:
> > I try to do the lab on Routing TCP/IP Vol I Page
> > 380,
> > according to the book, in order to let router
> > Curtiss receive network
> > 172.20.15.0,
> >
> > on interface ethernet0, use ip summary-address eigrp
> > 15 172.20.15.0
> > 255.255.255.0
> >
> > and no router eigrp 15 process, use
> > passive-interface ethernet 0
> >
> > I run the configuration on IOS 12.1, found it did
> > not work. When I remove the
> > command passive-interface ethernet 0,
> >
> > Earthart router produce the null0 route: 172.20.15.0
> > 255.255.255.0
> > and on Curtiss, the route appeared.
> >
> > Is there anyone have met the situation?
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:17 GMT-3