From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Sat Mar 05 2005 - 13:03:50 GMT-3
You have to be careful NOT to use passive-interface here. It functions
differently with EIGRP. Notes to this effect are also present in the
command reference on DocCD.
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Chuck Ryan
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2005 10:21 AM
To: Tom Young
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: eigrp neighbor command
Hello Tom,
Your correct in that hello packets to 224.0.0.10 will not be used. To see
what really happens when you use the neighbor command and passive-interface
under EIGRP, lab this up between 2 routers and observe the results.
I believe that you'll find the results you get when using this with EIGRP,
are nowhere near the same as when used with RIP.
Also, take a look at the EIGRP FAQ here on CCO with regards to the use of
the neighbor command under EIGRP, and what benefits it does not bring you:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/tech/tk365/technologies_q_and_a_item09186
a008012dac4.shtml#ten
Regards,
Chuck
At 09:56 AM 3/5/2005, Tom Young wrote:
>hi group
>
> The eigrp use multicast ip 224.0.0.10 for sharing the routing,but if
>I use the neighbor command in eigrp, it will transfer ip information by
>unicast to neighbor ,multicast ip 224.0.0.10 will not be used,right?
>
>
>__________________________________
>Let's Celebrate Together!
>Yahoo! JAPAN
>http://pr.mail.yahoo.co.jp/so2005/
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 03 2005 - 17:56:41 GMT-3