From: ccie2be (ccie2be@nyc.rr.com)
Date: Fri Jan 14 2005 - 17:41:58 GMT-3
Hi guys,
Have any of you had difficulty learning when to use the different versions of
this command.
I have but now I think I got it and want to confirm with the pool of GS brain
power.
Several protocols support a version of distance that specific to that
protocol.
For example, distance eigrp, distance ospf, and distance bgp. (Rip and isis
don't seem to have an equivalent)
In addition, there's the plain or IP version of distance <AD#> <ip addr mask>
[acl] command.
The way I think about these now is that the distance <protocol> version of the
command is sort of "wholesale".
It will change the AD for all routes in the route table that match that
protocol (or class) within that protocol.
While the distance <AD#> version of the command is more like "retail". It will
affect those routes that that are either
from a certain neighbor(s) or match the optional acl at the end of the
command.
Q1: Do people agree with this conceptualization?
Q2: Can the same thing be done with ip version of the command that can be
done with the protocol specific version
as long as the neighbors and acl are properly defined?
Q3: Has anyone come up with a simple way of knowing when using the ip version
of the command which ip address to use
when defining the source of the routes? I recall that sometimes it's the
router ID of the neighbor but sometimes the physical
address but can never remember which.
All your thoughts and insights are appreciated.
TIA, Tim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Feb 02 2005 - 22:10:23 GMT-3