From: Hobbs (deadheadblues@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Nov 05 2008 - 02:33:45 ARST
you are getting that message because they are on different subnets on the
ethernet side yet you have them physically connected to the same switch.
They are forming an adjacency over the frame connection.
when you advertise the ethernet segments, you are also sending hellos out
those interfaces...
if you want to get rid of the error, put the ports in different vlans on the
switch. or put passive interface for ethernet interfaces.
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 9:26 PM, Raghav Bhargava
<raghavbhargava12@gmail.com>wrote:
> Alright Experts,
>
> here i go again
>
> R1 is connected to R2 via FRame relay cloud on serial Interfaces. And
> also there Ethernet interfaces are connected via a switch.
>
> but my point is that when I advertise the ethernet Ip's which are on
> different subnet i get that message which is correct coz the ip's are
> on different subnet.
>
> R2#
> *Mar 30 17:22:39.531: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> 200.1.1.1 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0
> *Mar 30 17:22:53.707: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> 200.1.1.1 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0
> *Mar 30 17:23:07.991: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> 200.1.1.1 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0
> *Mar 30 17:23:22.087: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> 200.1.1.1 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0
> *Mar 30 17:23:35.491: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> 200.1.1.1 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0
> *Mar 30 17:23:48.987: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> 200.1.1.1 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0
> *Mar 30 17:24:02.867: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> 200.1.1.1 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0
> *Mar 30 17:24:17.515: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> 200.1.1.1 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0
> *Mar 30 17:24:31.907: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> 200.1.1.1 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0
> *Mar 30 17:24:45.031: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> 200.1.1.1 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0
> *Mar 30 17:24:59.371: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> 200.1.1.1 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0
> *Mar 30 17:25:13.311: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> 200.1.1.1 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0
>
> thanks
> /raghav
>
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 8:20 PM, Hobbs <deadheadblues@gmail.com> wrote:
> > they are on the same subnet 131.1.12.1 and 131.1.12.2, right? the 200
> > networks are the opposite ends...
> >
> > am i missing something? what is the actual physical topology? do you have
> > these routers plugged into the same switch as well as connected via
> > frame-relay?
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 9:05 PM, Raghav Bhargava <
> raghavbhargava12@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hey buddy,
> >>
> >> This is from Narbik's Soup to nuts Lab6 Eigrp Stub. and I have
> >> implemented it on my lab.
> >>
> >> here is the output on R1
> >>
> >>
> >> R1#sh ip ro
> >> Codes: C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP
> >> D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area
> >> N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2
> >> E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2
> >> i - IS-IS, su - IS-IS summary, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS
> >> level-2
> >> ia - IS-IS inter area, * - candidate default, U - per-user static
> >> route
> >> o - ODR, P - periodic downloaded static route
> >>
> >> Gateway of last resort is not set
> >>
> >> 1.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 4 subnets
> >> C 1.1.0.0 is directly connected, Loopback0
> >> C 1.1.1.0 is directly connected, Loopback1
> >> C 1.1.2.0 is directly connected, Loopback2
> >> C 1.1.3.0 is directly connected, Loopback3
> >> D 2.0.0.0/8 [90/2297856] via 131.1.12.2, 00:53:51, Serial0/0.1
> >> C 200.1.1.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet1/0
> >> D 200.2.2.0/24 [90/2195456] via 131.1.12.2, 00:00:32, Serial0/0.1
> >> 131.1.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
> >> C
> >> *Mar 30 18:11:00.903: IP-EIGRP(Default-IP-Routing-Table:100): Neighbor
> >> 200.2.2.2 not on common subnet for Ethernet1/0 131.1.12.0 is
> >> directly connected, Serial0/0.1
> >>
> >>
> >> thanks
> >> /raghav
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Atlanta CCIE <atlantaccie@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Why don't you lab it up and let us all know?
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 10:19 PM, Raghav Bhargava
> >> > <raghavbhargava12@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi Expert,
> >> >>
> >> >> This is my topology :-
> >> >>
> >> >> R1------------------------FR--------------------------R2
> >> >>
> >> >> Now I have to run Eigrp and the Ip Addressing is as follows:-
> >> >>
> >> >> Fast ethernet on R1:- 200.1.1.1/24
> >> >> Fast ethernet on R2:- 200.2.2.2/24
> >> >>
> >> >> My query is can the interfaces be on different subnets. If yes then
> >> >> can someone explain how the EIGRP neighbor Adjacency will come up
> >> >> ...???
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Warm Regards
> >> >> Raghav
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >> >>
> >> >>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> >> Subscription information may be found at:
> >> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Warm Regards
> >> Raghav
> >>
> >>
> >> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> Subscription information may be found at:
> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Warm Regards
> Raghav
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Dec 01 2008 - 08:18:29 ARST