From: JamesGEF (jamesgef@sympatico.ca)
Date: Thu Nov 20 2003 - 18:18:35 GMT-3
Hi Jonathan, you're absolutely right about the route being an External.
That's why I mentionned it being a pain when mutually redistributing into
RIP (EIGRP EX routes have higher admin distance than RIP).
But my question is if you want that network to be part of the EIGRP AS and
don't want EIGRP packets going to that specific interface, you could either
redistribute it as a connected or include it in your network statement and
make that interface passive.
The latter requires less configuration and that is ultimate question....If
not explicitly mentionned, why do all the IPExpert labs redistribute their
connected networks rather than include them in the network statements and
make the interface passive.
James
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan V Hays" <jhays@jtan.com>
To: "'JamesGEF'" <jamesgef@sympatico.ca>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 3:53 PM
Subject: RE: IPExpert Labs
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> JamesGEF
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2003 3:31 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: IPExpert Labs
>
>
> I have a question. I have IPExpert v5 workbook. Now, I've noticed in
> most of
> the labs that when enabling a protocol, like EIGRP for example, it will
> only
> include the network statements for the interfaces connecting the router
> to the
> AS. All other connections are redistributed (redistribute connected).
> Now my
> question is, if not explicitly mentionned...why do this? Isn't it the
> same
> as including the network statement and making the interface as passive
> thus
> keeping the network as internal?
>
> It's more work and sometimes is a pain for protocols like EIGRP whose
> admin
> distance for external routes is higher than most other protocols and
> when
> redistributing causes problems more configuration problems.
>
>
> Are they preparing me for the R&S lab where this is quite often
> experienced
> (answer only to a point of not violating your NDA)
>
> Thanks!
>
> James
> ============
> No, it's not the same as a network statement. On the contrary, a
> "redistribute connected" statement will be seen by that routing protocol
> as a foreign protocol. In EIGRP they will be marked as 'D EX' by that
> router's neighbor.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
> http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Dec 12 2003 - 12:29:15 GMT-3