From: George Roman (georgeroman@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Jul 11 2007 - 07:22:06 ART
I will use 0.0.0.0 wildcard mask wherever possible because it gives you
granularity and flexibility in the same time.
Best Regards,
George
On 7/11/07, Salau, Yemi <yemi.salau@siemens.com> wrote:
>
>
> Also this problem rise another one. What is the best way to announce net
> in a protocol?
>
> "That will depend on the school of thought you follow"
>
> Just to put the interface in the protocol with same command (where the
> protocol permit) or to announce the entire network?
>
> A school of thought prefers matching specific interface, that way you
> can control on which interface routing protocols are "activated" on, so
> that when newer interfaces are configured under that subnet, they would
> not participate in the routing process especially when you don't want to
> allow them to.
>
> What do you think about the grading in the real exam? I will get the
> points if i announce the /32 net. (of course if the task does not
> restrict me in any way, just says put this net/interface in the protocol
> domain)
>
> This doesn't deduct your points I would imagine, but you need to be
> aware of this: if the interface has mask of /24 and you bring it into
> EIGRP, it's network will come in as /24 wether you use "network x.x.x.x
> 0.0.0.0" or "network x.x.x.x 0.0.0.255"
>
> But if the interface has a mask of /32, it's network will come in as
> /32. The only exception I can think of is bringing in loopback
> interfaces into OSPF, those are treated as host routes by default and
> you need to made changes if required.
>
> But the bottom line is, no one will deduct you points so far at the end
> of the day you activate the routing process on required interfaces.
>
>
> Many Thanks
>
> Yemi Salau
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Cristian Ionescu
> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 8:13 AM
> To: Dan C
> Cc: George Roman; Mark Mckillop (mmckillo); ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: do not send Eigrp Hello on interfaces
>
> Thanks for all responses.
> I think the optin with net x.x.x.x 0.0.0.0 is the right one. I do not
> think that ACL is the soltion.
>
> Also this problem rise another one.
> What is the best way to announce net in a protocol?
> Just to put the interface in the protocol with same command (where the
> protocol permit) or to announce the entire network?
> What do you think about the grading in the real exam? I will get the
> points if i announce the /32 net. (of course if the task does not
> restrict me in any way, just says put this net/interface in the protocol
>
> domain)
>
> Thanks
>
> Dan C wrote:
> > Hi George,
> >
> > If you need to add any other interfaces into eigrp you will need just
> to use
> > 0.0.0.0 for them again eg:
> >
> > router ei 100
> > net 1.1.1.1 0.0.0.0
> > net 1.1.2.1 0.0.0.0
> >
> > this way no hellos will be sent out but on those 2 interfaces.... You
> can
> > verify using debug eigrp packets hello
> > Cheers,
> > Dan
> >
> > On 7/10/07, George Roman <georgeroman@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> You are right about that. if you put the wildcard mask of 0.0.0.0
> only
> >> that
> >> interface will participate in eigrp process, but if you want some
> other
> >> networks (on other interfaces) to get advertised into eigrp, i think
> the
> >> only solution is to put those interfaces in eigrp and use ACLs so you
> will
> >> not send hellos on them (ACLs because as Cristian said, the
> >> passive-interface command is forbidden).
> >>
> >> George
> >>
> >> On 7/10/07, Mark Mckillop (mmckillo) <mmckillo@cisco.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I think the point is to use the 0.0.0.0 in the network statement to
> >>> specify just the precise interfaces that you want enabled in the
> EIGRP
> >>> process.
> >>>
> >>> i.e. network 150.1.1.1 0.0.0.0 -> Just the interface with that
> specific
> >>> address
> >>>
> >>> Mark.
> >>>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of
> >>> George Roman
> >>> Sent: 10 July 2007 12:32
> >>> To: Cristian Ionescu; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >>> Subject: Re: do not send Eigrp Hello on interfaces
> >>>
> >>> I think one of the options that you have to filter eigrp is extended
> acl
> >>> (specify the protocol eigrp)
> >>>
> >>> George
> >>>
> >>> On 7/10/07, Cristian Ionescu <cristian.ionescu@omnilogic.ro> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi
> >>>>
> >>>> I have a task where it says to not send eigrp hello on interfaces
> that
> >>>>
> >>>> are not part of the eigrp domain but not to use passive-interface.
> >>>> It is ok to use neighbor?
> >>>> I have 4 routers on domain. I need to put in one router all 3 other
> >>>> routers?
> >>>>
> >>>> If i put under the router eigrp x menu, network y.y.y.y 0.0.0.0
> will
> >>>> have the same result?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>>
> >>>>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> >>>> _ Subscription information may be found at:
> >>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>>>
> >>>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> >>> Subscription information may be found at:
> >>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>>
> >>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> Subscription information may be found at:
> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Aug 18 2007 - 08:17:40 ART