From: Fanglo MA (fangloma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Jul 15 2002 - 07:53:34 GMT-3
Hi Kasturi,
I reload the lab with extensive debug this night and find that I'm wrong.
The router do redistribute when I enter passive-interface on link between
Earhart and Curtiss. I also notice that, however, the action from
passive-interface do affect route selection into redistribution. Once I
enter in passive mode, the routes from 172.20.15.0 can no longer be
advertized into IGRP domain. That why my pingscript failed in the last
labtime. The question remained is WHY this happen??
My understanding is passive interface command just prevents EIGRP from
forming neighborhood relationship. But it does more! It seems the passive
command removes the interface completely in EIGRP algorithm/procedure.
That explains why the redistribution with 172.20.15.0/30 and
172.20.15.4/30 will appear 172.20.0.0 from IGRP domain. Anyone could
explain further?
BTW, for your reference I'm using IOS 12.2(10a) in both Earhart and
Curtiss. Has anyone do the lab with different result would share point of
view?
Regards,
Fanglo
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, kasturi cisco wrote:
> Fanglo,
>
> Are u trying to say that u observe the "passive-interface" on Eahart to
> block the EIGRP routes from being redistributed into IGRP such that the
> routes are not seen in Curtliss ? Just trying to understand and try it out ?
>
> Thanks
> kasturi.
>
>
> >From: "Fanglo MA" <fangloma@pacific.net.hk>
> >Reply-To: "Fanglo MA" <fangloma@pacific.net.hk>
> >To: "'Harish DV/peakxv'" <harish.dv@peakxv.net>
> >CC: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Subject: RE: IP EIGRP summary address problem with passive interface
> >Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 09:43:44 +0800
> >
> >Hi Harish,
> >
> >Thanks for your reply. But the problem in concern is the passive interface
> >only connected with IGRP where that router running both EIGRP and IGRP. It
> >seems the passive interface command not only blocks the enqueue process to
> >physical interface but also affected the redistribution. My view to passive
> >interface is it only drop the packet out/in from the interface. Any idea?
> >
> >Regards,
> >Fanglo
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> >Harish DV/peakxv
> >Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2002 8:39 PM
> >To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >Subject: Re: IP EIGRP summary address problem with passive interface
> >
> >
> >Some one posted a problem with the scenario on Page 380 in tcp/ip vol.1
> >Actually, the passive interface command behaves differently in eigrp. Look
> >at this :
> >
> >http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/103/16.html
> >
> >I guess this is 12.0.9 onwards.
> >
> >The workaround is using a distribule list
> >
> >HTH
> >
> >Harish
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:36:30 GMT-3