From: Chris Hugo (chrishugo@yahoo.com)
Date: Sun Sep 15 2002 - 12:04:31 GMT-3
Ying I looked at the FAQ. The parser just includes it. A lot of commands is Cisco's IOS does the same thing. Let me call this chicken-in-egg problem.
Q. What does the neighbor statement in the EIGRP configuration section do?
A. Although the neighbor command is accepted by the Cisco IOS. parser, it should not be used. The neighbor statement does not behave as intended and can have a negative effect on EIGRP neighbors. To follow the bug ID link below and see detailed bug information, you must be a registered user and you must be logged in.
hth,
chris hugo
ying c wrote:Nieghbor command will unicast. Just don't put the
interface into passive mode, which will stop hello
packages.
router eigrp 100
passive-interface default
no passive-interface Ethernet0 <<<-- cannot in
passive mode
no passive-interface Serial1
network 16.1.1.0 0.0.0.255
network 16.2.2.0 0.0.0.15
neighbor 16.2.2.13 Ethernet0 <<<-- unicast
no auto-summary
no eigrp log-neighbor-changes
!
r2#sie nei <<<--- two neighbors
IP-EIGRP neighbors for process 100
H Address Interface Hold Uptime
SRTT RTO Q Seq Type
(sec)
(ms) Cnt Num
1 16.1.1.1 Se1 10 00:49:50
740 4440 0 5
0 16.2.2.13 Et0 13 00:49:51
13 200 0 5 S
r2#debug ip packet detail 199
IP packet debugging is on (detailed) for access list
199
r2#
00:51:39: IP: s=16.2.2.2 (local), d=16.2.2.13
(Ethernet0), len 60, sending, proto=88 <<<- unicast
00:51:39: IP: s=16.1.1.2 (local), d=224.0.0.10
(Serial1), len 60, sending broad/multicast, proto=88
--- Joseph Rinehart wrote:
> The net of this is that I am trying to see if there
> is a way to force EIGRP
> to use unicast rather than multicast for the hello
> messages. Any ideas?
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Edward Monk"
> To: "'Joseph Rinehart'" ;
>
> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 3:56 PM
> Subject: RE: EIGRP Manual Neighbor
> Configuration/Unicast
>
>
> > Joseph,
> >
> > It supposedly should work but Cisco reports there
> is a bug and
> > recommends not using it. I tried to search on the
> bug but it gives me a
> > message about it not being able to be displayed.
> Not sure why. Maybe a
> > there is Cisco employee who could pull it for us
> to see what it is?
> >
> > Look under "EIGRP frequently asked questions" on
> the Cisco site and you
> > will see a document called. "What does the
> neighbor statement in the
> > EIGRP configuration section do?"
> >
> >
>
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/103/eigrpfaq.shtml#Q9
> >
> > Basically it says don't use it because it does
> very bad things. Hmmmm...
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> > Joseph Rinehart
> > Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 4:08 PM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: EIGRP Manual Neighbor
> Configuration/Unicast
> >
> > Weird question, but I can't find any trace of this
> on CCO.
> >
> > EIGRP uses multicasts to send out hellos for
> neighbor discovery as does
> > other routing protocols. In certain environments
> where you cannot
> > broadcast
> > or multicast that can be a problem. I tried
> programming in neighbors
> > manually and the hellos seems to be sent out in
> non broadcast mode.
> >
> > The thing is that there is NO neighbor command
> documented for EIGRP,
> > though
> > I looked. I tried this on 11.2 as well as 12.0
> code so I know it works.
> >
> > First, does anyone know the details about the
> function of the
> > undocumented
> > neighbor command in EIGRP? Does it indeed use
> unicast rather than
> > multicast
> > for hellos?
> >
> > Second, if this is not the case is there a way to
> force unicast in EIGRP
> > for
> > hellos?
> >
> > Looking forward to the responses.
> >
> > Joe
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Oct 07 2002 - 07:43:52 GMT-3