Re: Peer Neighbor Route

Marcin,
I think that the one place where you would need them, is if both interfaces
are on a different subnet, which is possible with PPP. Without them you
won't be able to communicate.

Tom

On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 8:47 PM, Marcin Zgola <MZgola_at_netrixllc.com> wrote:

> Why would you ever need to have /32 network of your neighbor ppp interface
> in your routing table?
>
>
> Marcin Zgola | Netrix, LLC | 847.283.7400 |(Direct) 847.283.7328| (fax)
> 847.283.7610 | http://www.netrixllc.com/
> Internetwork Lead | CCIE# 18676 (Security)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Vincent Tay
> Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 8:20 PM
> To: Arista Wirawan
> Cc: Cisco certification
> Subject: Re: Peer Neighbor Route
>
> Hi Arista,
>
> Tested. It works perfect by removing the peer neighbor-route. However, if
> to use ip address negotiable, peer neighbour will be needed. Is there any
> ways to overcome this as removing the peer neighbor-route is not an option
> anymore?
>
> Regards
>
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 7:23 AM, Arista Wirawan <aristaw_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The peer neighbor-route command on the interface serial with ppp
> > encapsulation will add the /32 route of the other end router.
> >
> > Try no peer neighbor-route both end, shut and mo shut.. those
> > additional
> > /32 route will be gone..
> >
> > Aris
> > CCIE #35534
> > Sent from my HTC
> >
> >
> > ----- Reply message -----
> > From: "Vincent Tay" <vtay.75_at_gmail.com>
> > To: "Ccielab_at_groupstudy.com" <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
> > Subject: Peer Neighbor Route
> > Date: Tue, May 29, 2012 11:49 PM
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have some issue with peer neighbor route.
> >
> > Network Setup
> > EIGRP Domain
> > ________________________
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > |
> > OSPF 2 | OSPF 1 |
> > R4
> > ------------PPPoE-----------------R3-------------------------------R2
> >
> >
> > R3 has three routes as below once the PPPoE has been setup.
> >
> > C 5.5.34.3/32 is directly connected, Dialer1
> > O 5.5.34.0/24 [110/1786] via 5.5.34.4, 00:14:17
> > C 5.5.34.4/32 is directly connected, Dialer1
> >
> > However on R2, it has only two routes as below.
> >
> > O IA 5.5.34.3/32 [110/1849] via 5.5.23.3, 00:14:13, Serial0/1
> > O IA 5.5.34.0/24 [110/1850] via 5.5.23.3, 00:14:13, Serial0/1
> >
> > The ospf network statement is correct using "network 5.5.34.0
> > 0.0.0.255 area 2" on R3. My question is what happen to 5.5.34.4 route.
> > It should appear in R2 as interarea routes right. Another question is
> > once i perform mutual redistribution on R3 and R2, i receive
> > 5.5.34.4/32 as external routes. Puzzled.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > _ Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Wed May 30 2012 - 22:43:10 ART