From: Matt White (mwhite23@gmail.com)
Date: Fri Mar 04 2005 - 22:38:57 GMT-3
So... You're saying that for ALL frame-relay physical interfaces other
than a hub RIP router, you should enter "ip split-horizon"?
Would this configuration example look appropriate for this explaination?
!
Interface s0
Description EIGRP HUB
ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.248
ip split-horizon
no ip eigrp 90 split-horizon
encapsulation frame-relay
!
Interface s1
Description RIP HUB
ip address 2.2.2.2 255.255.255.248
encapsulation frame-relay
!
Interface s2
Description EIGRP SPOKE
ip address 3.3.3.3 255.255.255.248
ip split-horizon
encapsulation frame-relay
!
Interface s3
Description RIP SPOKE
ip address 4.4.4.4 255.255.255.248
ip split-horizon
encapsulation frame-relay
!
Interface s4
Description OSPF (or ISIS), any type
ip address 5.5.5.5 255.255.255.248
ip split-horizon
encapsulation frame-relay
router eigrp 90
no auto-summary
network 1.1.1.1 0.0.0.0
network 3.3.3.3 0.0.0.0
router rip
version 2
no auto-summary
passive-interface default
no passive-interface Serial1
no passive-interface Serial3
network 2.0.0.0
network 4.0.0.0
router ospf 1
network 5.5.5.5 0.0.0.0 area 0
This question, as far as being "right or wrong" is driving me crazy.
Thank you for any additional assistance.
MW
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 16:32:09 -0500, Jongsoo.Kim@intelsat.com
<Jongsoo.Kim@intelsat.com> wrote:
> You are correct and this was one painful and stupid mistake I always did in
> IGP.
>
> I am not sure what you mean by a stub rip, but it should be on all active
> rip interfaces except Hub interface in hub and spoke topology.
> Same for eigrp. But as you said, I will also turn on for OSPF or ISIS
> protocols.
>
> In my opinion, rip is very hard topic in igp because it has a lot of tricks
> a lab writer love to use such as split-horizon, v1 and v2,
> multicast,broadcast,and unicast, auto-summary, passive interface, the fact
> that it doesn't require neighbor adjacency, and so on.
>
> Regards
>
> Jongsoo
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt White [mailto:mwhite23@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, 04 March, 2005 3:41 PM
> To: Group Study
> Subject: ip split-horizon on frame-relay; link state protocols
>
> Let's say I have encapsulation frame-relay on a physical serial
> interface, ip split-horizon becomes automatically disabled. If I
> assign an IP address and apply this to an OSPF process, would it be
> considered best practice to re-enable split-horizon?
>
> I understand the split-horizon has nothing to do with a link state
> protocol like OSPF, but would this hurt/help in any specific
> situations?
>
> I believe it IS considered best-practice to do this on a stub RIP
> frame-relay physical interface, correct?
>
> Thanks for you help guys.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> ############################################################
>
> Building on 40 Years of Leadership - As a global communications leader with 40 years of experience, Intelsat helps service providers,
> broadcasters, corporations and governments deliver information and entertainment anywhere in the world, instantly, securely and reliably.
>
> ############################################################
> This email message is for the sole use of the intended
> recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
> information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and
> destroy all copies of the original message. Any views
> expressed in this message are those of the individual
> sender, except where the sender specifically states them
> to be the views of Intelsat, Ltd. and its subsidiaries.
> ############################################################
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 03 2005 - 17:56:41 GMT-3