2 EIGRP process redistributed together?

From: Dennis Worth (dennis.worth@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Feb 27 2008 - 14:45:58 ARST


Hi group,

I would to find some clarification/facts on whether redistributing between
to EIGRP process' requires connected subnets into each as well? for example

eigrp 100 ---- R1 ------eigrp 200

*router eigrp 100
 redistribute connected metric 1500 10 255 1 1500 route-map
Connected-->EIGRP-100
 redistribute eigrp 200 metric 10000 100 255 1 1500
 network 172.16.16.0 0.0.0.255
 network 172.16.100.0 0.0.3.255
 network 172.16.124.0 0.0.0.255
 no auto-summary
 no eigrp log-neighbor-changes

router eigrp 200
 redistribute connected metric 1500 10 255 1 1500 route-map
Connected-->EIGRP-200
 redistribute eigrp 100 metric 10000 100 255 1 1500
 network 172.16.12.0 0.0.0.255
 distance eigrp 91 171
 no auto-summary
 no eigrp log-neighbor-changes
*

*ip prefix-list Connected-->EIGRP-100 seq 5 permit 172.16.255.0/24
ip prefix-list Connected-->EIGRP-100 seq 10 permit 172.16.12.0/24
!
ip prefix-list Connected-->EIGRP-200 seq 5 permit 172.16.255.0/24
ip prefix-list Connected-->EIGRP-200 seq 10 permit 172.16.16.0/24
ip prefix-list Connected-->EIGRP-200 seq 15 permit 172.16.100.0/22
ip prefix-list Connected-->EIGRP-200 seq 20 permit 172.16.124.0/24

route-map Connected-->EIGRP-100 permit 10
 match ip address prefix-list Connected-->EIGRP-100
!
route-map Connected-->EIGRP-200 permit 10
 match ip address prefix-list Connected-->EIGRP-200
*

I really don't see any difference in from a connectivity standpoint.

Thanks for your replies

-- 
Dennis Worth


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Mar 01 2008 - 16:54:50 ARST