From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Sat Aug 07 2004 - 08:45:32 GMT-3
The bottom line is that you do not want to learn about the
"tunnel-destination" through the tunnel itself. You solve this through
distribute-lists, distance, metrics, or whatever method you deem
appropriate.
Whoever wrote that TAC document simply took the lazy approach. As a CCIE
candidate, it's best to know WHY!
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, CISSP,
JNCIP, et al.
IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
http://www.ipexpert.net
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of marc
van hoof
Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2004 4:38 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: tunnel recursive routing problems...
Read: http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/105/gre_flap.html
Basically, it's all about recursive routing loops when you run a routing
protocol that injects host routes over a tunnel.
The path to the tunnel destination IP is shown as via the tunnel, which is
impossible.
The suggested remedy in this doc is to use a static route to the tunnel
destination, but in the ccie lab we're not allowed to use static routes.
Will a distribute-list solve this problem ? how do I stop eigrp from
advertising a host route, or stop a recipient from putting it into the
routing table.
Regards,
-marc.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 03 2004 - 07:02:34 GMT-3