RE: Peer Neighbor Route

Great discussion guys. Thank you

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: Brian Dennis [mailto:bdennis_at_ine.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2012 12:44 AM
To: Tom Kacprzynski; Marcin Zgola
Cc: Vincent Tay; Arista Wirawan; Cisco certification
Subject: Re: Peer Neighbor Route

It's also needed when one side negotiates its IP address via IPCP (ip address negotiated or ip address pool <pool>) and the subnet mask is not requested/offered. This means the remote side will use a /32 subnet mask for the IP address it receives from the remote end since one was not learned via IPCP. The /32 route to the remote end that is installed is needed to enable reachability between the two end points since both ends aren't on the same subnet due to the fact they /32 subnet masks. You could resolve this other ways but leaving the peer neighbor-route command on is the simplest.

If the subnet mask is received via IPCP then the /32 route to the remote end isn't installed as the default for the peer neighbor-route command changes from on to off for the receiving side on the dynamic IP address.

If you all would like to see examples let me know.

Brian Dennis, CCIEx5 #2210 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/SP/Voice) bdennis_at_ine.com
 
INE, Inc.
http://www.INE.com

On 5/30/12 8:43 PM, "Tom Kacprzynski" <tom.kac_at_gmail.com> wrote:

>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
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Thu May 31 2012 - 22:13:30 ART