From: Jonathan Hays (nomad@gfoyle.org)
Date: Tue Jan 20 2004 - 09:57:34 GMT-3
you wrote:
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
>Behalf Of Michael Snyder
>Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 9:12 PM
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: Agggg! eigrp stub connected vs. ip summary-address eigrp
>
>
>Am I the only one who didn't know that eigrp stub routers break ip
>summary-address commands?
= = =
Haven't tried it myself, but what you state seems to contradict the
documentation:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/
fiprrp_r/1rfeigrp.htm#1024326
"The summary keyword will permit the EIGRP Stub Routing feature to send
summary routes. Summary routes can be created manually with the summary
address command or automatically at a major network border router with
the auto-summary command enabled. This option is enabled by default.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Note Multi-access interfaces, such as ATM, Ethernet, Frame Relay,
ISDN PRI, and X.25, are supported by the EIGRP Stub Routing feature only
when all routers on that interface, except the hub, are configured as
stub routers.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Examples
In the following example, the eigrp stub command is used to configure
the router as a stub that advertises connected and summary routes:
router eigrp 1
network 10.0.0.0
eigrp stub
- - -
Is it possible that using a keyword such as "connected" might disable
the "summary" function?
Jonathan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Feb 02 2004 - 09:07:47 GMT-3