From: Justin Menga (Justin.Menga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Nov 01 2000 - 16:48:18 GMT-3
The reason why is that the metric for the route via either path is the same.
Thus, both routes are installed in the route table, and equal cost load
balancing is used for packets going to that network. This will happen for
all the common protocols (even RIP) as they all support equal cost load
balancing.
If you want only a single route to exist, you could alter the metric on
either the RouterB or the RouterC interface to the destination network.
This is achieved easiest by altering the delay or bandwidth of the
interface. You could also block the route from either router using filters,
or play with offset lists on RouterA.
IGRP does also support unequal cost load balancing like EIGRP through the
variance command.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike.Wiley@equant.com [mailto:Mike.Wiley@equant.com]
Sent: Thursday, 2 November 2000 8:08 a.m.
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: IGRP Question
Can anyone confirm why I might have 2 routes appear in the routing table for
an
IGRP internal route.
Existing example:
RouterA is connected to an Ethernet segment where 2 routers reside (routerB
&
C). The remote destination from RouterA is hanging off of RoutersB & C's
'E'
interfaces (They are running HSRP also). Remote network is 144.10.1.0, and
when
I show ip route on RouterA, I see two possible routes to this network via
B's e0
and C's e0. Why? Routing information should be best path only, EIGRP uses
feasible successor not IGRP. Is this inherent to an ethernet environment
where
multiple routes can exist in the routing table?
Thanks in advance,
Michael Wiley
Internetworking Operations Engineer
mike.wiley@equant.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:25:39 GMT-3