From: Michael Popovich (m.popovich@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Jun 05 2002 - 19:11:21 GMT-3
It does have the same mask as IGRP.
r1----Frame----R2
|
Frame
|
R5
172.150.2.0/24 between R1 and R2
172.150.1.0/24 between R1 and R5
Loopback 0=10.2.2.2/24 on R2.
R1 to R2 is EIGRP
R2 to R5 is IGRP
Loopback 0 on R2 is redistributed via connected into EIGRP.
10.2.2.0/24 shows up in EIGRP topology on R1 but not routing table.
10.2.2.0/24 shows up in R5 routing table via IGRP from R1.
EIGRP and IGRP have same AS number so redistribution is happening on R1.
MP
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin, Chris" <chris@pacinter.net>
To: "Michael Popovich" <m.popovich@mchsi.com>; "CCIE GROUPSTUDY"
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: EIGRP Topology Issue
> it looks to me your running IGRP, from what the route table shows, and i
> would guess your loopback has a mask that doesnt match your outbound
> interface on the router running igrp.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Popovich" <m.popovich@mchsi.com>
> To: "CCIE GROUPSTUDY" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 2:21 PM
> Subject: EIGRP Topology Issue
>
>
> > I have a virtual-template connecting R1 and R2 over frame. On R2 I am
> getting
> > all the routes via EIGRP and I am redistributing connected with a
> route-map to
> > limit it to Loopback 0 network. The loopback 0 network on R2 appears in
> the
> > EIGRP topology of R1 but not in the routing table.
> >
> > Any ideas?
> >
> > TIA
> >
> > MP
> >
> > r1#sh ip eigrp topology
> > IP-EIGRP Topology Table for AS(100)/ID(192.168.100.1)
> >
> > Codes: P - Passive, A - Active, U - Update, Q - Query, R - Reply,
> > r - reply Status, s - sia Status
> >
> > P 10.2.2.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 22688000
> > via 172.150.2.2 (22688000/128256), Virtual-Access1
> > P 10.0.0.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 40640000
> > via Redistributed (40640000/0)
> > P 10.1.1.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 128256
> > via Redistributed (128256/0)
> > P 10.20.20.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 40512000
> > via Redistributed (40512000/0)
> > P 192.168.100.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 128256
> > via Redistributed (128256/0)
> > P 172.150.8.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 40537600
> > via Redistributed (40537600/0)
> > P 172.150.2.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 22560000
> > via Connected, Virtual-Access1
> > P 172.150.2.2/32, 1 successors, FD is 22560000
> > via Rconnected (22560000/0)
> > P 172.150.1.0/24, 1 successors, FD is 40512000
> > via Redistributed (40512000/0)
> >
> > R1 routing table:
> >
> > r1#si
> >
> > Gateway of last resort is not set
> >
> > 172.150.0.0/16 is variably subnetted, 4 subnets, 2 masks
> > I 172.150.8.0/24 [100/158350] via 172.150.1.5, 00:01:24, Serial0
> > C 172.150.1.0/24 is directly connected, Serial0
> > 10.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 4 subnets
> > I 10.0.0.0 [100/158750] via 172.150.1.5, 00:01:24, Serial0
> > C 10.20.20.0 is directly connected, Serial0
> > C 10.1.1.0 is directly connected, Loopback0
> > C 192.168.1.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0
> > C 192.168.100.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback1
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 02 2002 - 08:12:25 GMT-3