RE: Order of evaluation of multiple "distance" commands

From: Shine Joseph (shinepjoseph@iprimus.com.au)
Date: Fri Mar 14 2008 - 19:17:23 ARST

• Next message: Farrukh Haroon: "OT: Re: What makes the outside interface "outside" ?"
• Previous message: Carlos G Mendioroz: "Re: What makes the outside interface "outside" ?"
• Maybe in reply to: YourPal: "Order of evaluation of multiple "distance" commands"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Emil,

You are right. It's the first match-rule. There are a couple of good
examples in 12.3 command reference. (It appears that 12.4 command reference
is broken.)

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_3t/ip_route/command/reference/ip2_c1g
t.html#wp1095080

HTH,
Shine

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
YourPal
Sent: Saturday, 15 March 2008 7:25 AM
To: Cisco certification
Subject: Order of evaluation of multiple "distance" commands

Hi Group,

I need advice on the order of evaluation of multiple "distance" commands for
RIP.

For the following config:

!
router rip
 distance 100 173.1.125.0 0.0.0.255
 distance 110 173.1.125.5 0.0.0.0
!

All routes originated by 173.1.125.5 are given AD of 100. It looks like a
first-match rule to me.

For the following config:

!
router rip
 distance 255
 distance 120 173.1.125.5 0.0.0.0
!

This time, all routes originated by 173.1.125.5 are given AD of 120 while
other routes disappear.

Please let me know if there is any rule of thumb.

Thank you.

BR,
Emil

• Next message: Farrukh Haroon: "OT: Re: What makes the outside interface "outside" ?"
• Previous message: Carlos G Mendioroz: "Re: What makes the outside interface "outside" ?"
• Maybe in reply to: YourPal: "Order of evaluation of multiple "distance" commands"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Apr 01 2008 - 07:53:53 ART