From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Sat Oct 21 2006 - 14:52:21 ART
Or perhaps a nice "best practice" thing to get in the habit of is using
"passive default" and then you must deliberately choose which interfaces
have peers to use the "no passive ..." on. I've always found this helps me
keep things clean without wasting MY OWN cpu cycles. :)
Just a thought....
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, JNCIE
#153, CISSP, et al.
CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-J
IPExpert VP - Curriculum Development
IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
smorris@ipexpert.com
http://www.ipexpert.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Brian Dennis
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 12:50 PM
To: Laurent Dupraz; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Passive-interface for loopback0
If you are referring to the CCIE lab then there aren't any rules. If they
ask you to make them passive then do. If they don't ask then don't make
them passive.
In the real world if you don't want to waste CPU cycles you can make any
interface that will not have a "neighbor" passive (i.e loopback).
HTH,
Brian Dennis, CCIE #2210 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security)
bdennis@internetworkexpert.com
Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987
Direct: 775-745-6404 (Outside the US and Canada)
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Laurent Dupraz
Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 12:58 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Passive-interface for loopback0
Dear all,
what are the rules concerning loopback 0 passive-interface:
for example:
OSPF:
int loopback0
ip add x.x.x.x x.x.x.x
!
router ospf 1
net ...
passive-interface loopback0
! ================================= I think not needed
RIP
int loopback0
ip add x.x.x.x x.x.x.x
!
router RIP
net ...
passive-interface loopback0
! ================================= I think needed
EIGRP
int loopback0
ip add x.x.x.x x.x.x.x
!
router EIGRP 1
net ...
passive-interface loopback0
! ================================= I think needed
Thanks for your support
Laurent
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Nov 01 2006 - 07:29:06 ART