From: Schulz, Dave (DSchulz@dpsciences.com)
Date: Thu May 11 2006 - 11:28:30 ART
That is correct. My understanding is, that when you configure the
neighbor command that all updates are then "unicast" to only configured
neighbors, not taking the passive interface into to consideration. I
believe that your lab had the requirement of not using the passive
interface and restricting updates to a particular interface. I would be
interested if there is another way to do this.
Dave Schulz,
Email: dschulz@dpsciences.com
-----Original Message-----
From: JB [mailto:jellyboy@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 10:18 AM
To: Schulz, Dave
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: EIGRP - Advertising from specific interface
The neighbor command will unicast advertise to a particular neighbor,
but I don't think it will tell the router what interface to advertise
the update out of.
JB
On 5/11/06, Schulz, Dave <DSchulz@dpsciences.com> wrote:
> JB - Take a look at the neighbor command. This may help you.
>
> Dave Schulz
> Email: dschulz@dpsciences.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> JB
> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 2:22 AM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: EIGRP - Advertising from specific interface
>
> The lab I am redoing asks for EIGRP updates to be restricted to a
> particular interface without using the passive-interface command. The
> interface address is, for example, 1.1.1.1/24. The WB solution is
> using #network 1.1.1.1 0.0.0.0
> I am just wondering if the line #network 1.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 would also
> be acceptible if none of the other interface on that particular router
> falls within that 1.1.1.0/24 range? I know the #network 1.1.1.0
> 0.0.0.255 is not the best solution, but I believe it still does
> fulfill the requirements..... Any thoughts???
>
> Cheers,
>
> JB
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 01 2006 - 06:33:21 ART