ISIS loopback Dilemma

From: SHARMA,MOHIT (HP-Germany,ex1) (mohit.sharma@hp.com)
Date: Fri Jun 20 2003 - 10:38:09 GMT-3

• Next message: SHARMA,MOHIT (HP-Germany,ex1): "RE: isis multi area"
• Previous message: MADMAN: "Re: Cisco TAC satisfaction rating going down...."
• Next in thread: Snow, Tim: "RE: ISIS loopback Dilemma"
• Maybe reply: Snow, Tim: "RE: ISIS loopback Dilemma"
• Maybe reply: kasturi cisco: "RE: ISIS loopback Dilemma"
• Maybe reply: Michael Breen \(mbreen\): "RE: ISIS loopback Dilemma"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

HI All,

One more question regarding ISIS.
If the question specifies that isis should not send packets over loopback
interface but advertise it.

This link on Cisco
http://www.cisco.com/warp/customer/97/is-is-ip-config.html does this by
just specifying the lo interface as passive under router isis.
However some other labs, also do specify "ip router isis" under the lo
interface and then make it passive.

I have tried both ways and both seem to work the same way.

The question now, is- Does it make a difference if we dont specify the ip
router isis command under the lo interface?

And THE GOLDEN QUESTION- Which is the best way of doing it?? THE CISCO WAY
;-) (maybe)

Thanks as always.

Smiles,

Mohit.

• Next message: SHARMA,MOHIT (HP-Germany,ex1): "RE: isis multi area"
• Previous message: MADMAN: "Re: Cisco TAC satisfaction rating going down...."
• Next in thread: Snow, Tim: "RE: ISIS loopback Dilemma"
• Maybe reply: Snow, Tim: "RE: ISIS loopback Dilemma"
• Maybe reply: kasturi cisco: "RE: ISIS loopback Dilemma"
• Maybe reply: Michael Breen \(mbreen\): "RE: ISIS loopback Dilemma"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jul 04 2003 - 11:11:02 GMT-3