RE: EIGRP Updates

From: Ben Holko (ben.holko@globalcenter.net.au)
Date: Sun Oct 29 2006 - 05:02:20 ART


passive interface will stop eigrp sending/receiving all eigrp packets on that interface - even if you have specified neighbors
 
If I've understood your question, you want to allow adjacency between the listed routers, but not to any other routers either already existing or that may exist in the future
 
in this case, you need to make an access-list that will block eigrp packets not wanted, something like
 
ip access-list 188 permit eigrp host <r5> any
ip access-list 188 permit eigrp host <r6> any
ip access-list 188 deny eigrp any any
ip access-list 188 permit ip any any
 
using a neighbor statement will allow adjacency when it could not otherwise form for whatever reason, but specifying r5 and r6 neighbors will not stop other neighbor relationships from forming
 
Ben

 

________________________________

From: nobody@groupstudy.com on behalf of Emil Patel
Sent: Sun 10/29/2006 2:58 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Cc: nobody@groupstudy.com
Subject: EIGRP Updates

If the question asked to only send eigrp updates to r5 fa0/0 and r6 e0/0
does it implies that updates should be sent unicast with the use neighbor
statement.

Will use of passive default statement accomplish same thing? Using neighbor
statement the updates will be sent unicast, but suppressing hello with
passive interface the updates are sent multicast.

Can some one shed some light on when to use neighbor v/s passive interface
command.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Nov 01 2006 - 07:29:07 ART