RE: EIGRP question

From: Cameron, John (johcamer@cisco.com)
Date: Sun May 04 2003 - 11:01:50 GMT-3


The alternative would be to "turn on" EIGRP only for those interfaces
that are required with the specific wildcard bits set:

router eigrp 14
 redistribute connected route-map CONNECT
 network 172.16.104.0 0.0.0.7 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
 no auto-summary
 no eigrp log-neighbor-changes

HTH,
JDC

-----Original Message-----
From: Ram Shummoogum [mailto:rshummoo@ca.ibm.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2003 5:49 PM
To: ccie2be@swbell.net
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: EIGRP question

My guess would be passive interface. In most cases the LAN interface is a
dead end, therefore it make sense to passive them.

Cheers,
RAM

"Mike Williams" <ccie2be@swbell.net>@groupstudy.com on 05/03/2003 03:50:30
PM

Please respond to "Mike Williams" <ccie2be@swbell.net>

Sent by: nobody@groupstudy.com

To: "CCIELab@Groupstudy.com" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
cc:
Subject: EIGRP question

If a requirement says "ensure LAN segments don't recieve any unnecessary
traffic", what are they referring to? This may or may not be
specifically related to EIGRP, but I'm wonder if this is broacast
control, or reducing the hello time on EIGRP neighbors or what.

TIA,
Mike W.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jun 02 2003 - 15:13:36 GMT-3