From: Victor Cappuccio (cvictor@protokolgroup.com)
Date: Mon Aug 28 2006 - 13:04:15 ART
Nice Question Sean
IMO this is a little typo at the DocCD
If you look at a Router running a 12.4(2)T3 Version
R6(config-if)#ip summary-address eigrp 100 200.0.0.0 ?
A.B.C.D IP network mask
Testing:
R6#show ip int brief | in 200
Loopback200 200.200.1.1 YES manual up
up
Loopback2001 200.200.2.1 YES manual up
up
Loopback2002 200.200.3.1 YES manual up
up
ip prefix-list SECONDARY seq 5 permit 200.200.2.0/24
interface FastEthernet0/0
ip address 133.1.26.6 255.255.255.0
ip summary-address eigrp 100 200.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 5 leak-map TEMP
route-map TEMP permit 10
match ip address prefix-list SECONDARY
!
R6#show run | b router eigrp
router eigrp 100
network 133.1.26.6 0.0.0.0
network 200.0.0.0 0.255.255.255
At the remote end I'm receiving these routes
D 200.200.2.0/24 [90/156160] via 133.1.26.6, 00:00:17, FastEthernet0/0
D 200.0.0.0/8 [90/156160] via 133.1.26.6, 00:00:27, FastEthernet0/0
If I change the Network/Mask to a Network wildmask at f0/0 on R6 then I get
this error message
R6(config-if)#ip summ ei 100 200.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 5 leak-map TEMP
IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Discontiguous mask is not supported
So I think this should confirm that little thing at the docCD ;)
Saludos and Thanks
Victor.-
-----Mensaje original-----
De: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] En nombre de Sean C
Enviado el: Lunes, 28 de Agosto de 2006 11:31 a.m.
Para: GroupStudy
Asunto: EIGRP summary command
Hello all,
Ok, these are the little things that can drive one crazy as their lab dates
looms close. I was reviewing the notes on the leak-map option on 'ip
summary-address eirgp'.
Here's the documentation on 12.4:
ip summary-address eigrp 1 10.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 leak-map LEAK-10-1-1
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios124/124cr/hirp_r
/
rte_eih.htm#wp1097180
Here's the docs on 12.3
ip summary-address eigrp 109 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0 95
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios123/123cgcr/iprr
p
_r/ip2_i1g.htm#wp1041060
Notice how the subnet mask is represented on the two examples? 12.4 shows
the
subnet represented as an ACL's wildcard mask (and states as such). 12.3
code
(and other docs I've searched), shows the subnet mask represent like a
normal
subnet mask. Now, I'm not going batty here, am I? Did Cisco flip how to
represent the subnet mask in 12.4 code? Sorry, I don't have access to a
12.4
IOS to verify.
Thanks,
Sean
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 01 2006 - 15:41:59 ART