Re: EIGRP - Split Horizon

My last might have come out wrong. My apology to you Scott. This the end of
the and it is taking its toll on me.

What I meant what let's try to go back to the fundamental of distance vector
protocol and see how the info is exchanged between neighbor.

I think I would leave it here....

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 5:18 PM, jules NYA BAWEU <nyabaweu_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> " When you look in R3's topology table (using the 'all-links' switch) to
> view the entry for R1 Lo0, how is it organized? Don't we see a single entry
> for 1.1.1.1/32 and then, indented, two different interfaces through which
> it is reachable? If R3 were to consider that it had two unique 1.1.1.1/32prefixes in its topology table, wouldn't it stand to reason that we'd see
> two distinct entries instead? "
>
> Yes the router does know that they are different - that it why it keeps the
> prefix, interface and metric - those make the entries different evethought
> you see them grouped in your topology table or routing table (case of
> variance or exact equal path).
>
> No offense, but I will invite you to re-read fundamental of distance vector
> protocol - then Split Horizon - remember that this topic is tied to distance
> vector protocol only - i.e. EIGRP (forget what they say about this being an
> hybrid, it is a distance vector ) , IGRP and RIP.

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Mon Jan 10 2011 - 18:07:07 ART