Is it sufficient in OSPF and EIGRP to use network x.x.x.x with mask of 0.0.0.0 to allow updates on a particular interface without using passive-interface default and no passive the specific interface? Or do we need to do both to make sure updates are only sent through the specific interface?
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 12:00 AM, <[email protected]>wrote: > Send CCIE_RS mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of CCIE_RS digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Network Advertisements. ([email protected]) > 2. Re: Network Advertisements. (Marko Milivojevic) > 3. Re: Troubleshooting (Di Bias, Steve) > 4. Re: Troubleshooting (Di Bias, Steve) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 22:01:49 +0000 > From: [email protected] > To: "Amer Mustafa" <[email protected]>, > [email protected], [email protected] > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Network Advertisements. > Message-ID: > > > <2008500729-1287007307-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-10837830...@bda703.bisx.prod.on.blackberry > > > > Content-Type: text/plain > > Be as specific as possible, unless otherwise told. You could do the > 0.0.0.255 but you leave room for advertisement into something else ( other > task later on) which you may or may not want. > > I always go all 0s unless I cannot. > > -nick > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry > > -----Original Message----- > From: Amer Mustafa <[email protected]> > Sender: [email protected] > Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:35:29 > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Network Advertisements. > > _______________________________________________ > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > visit www.ipexpert.com > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 18:35:40 -0400 > From: Marko Milivojevic <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: Amer Mustafa <[email protected]>, > [email protected], [email protected] > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Network Advertisements. > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Adding to what everyone else said.... > > Amer, as long as your network statement "catches" only the intended > interface(s), you are fine. If your netmasks are /24, it's OK to use > 0.0.0.255 - in fact, the easiest way is to just copy/paste the > configured IP of the interface. IOS will not allow any overlaps here*, > unless you change the mask. However, if your mask is not /24, DO NOT > use 0.0.0.255 - use the wildacrd mask that will cover only the > intended interface. > > [*] Virtual-templates being an exception. > > -- > Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 > Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert > > FREE CCIE training: http://bit.ly/vLecture > > Mailto: [email protected] > Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 > Web: http://www.ipexpert.com/ > > On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 18:01, <[email protected]> wrote: > > Be as specific as possible, unless otherwise told. You could do the > 0.0.0.255 but you leave room for advertisement into something else ( other > task later on) which you may or may not want. > > > > I always go all 0s unless I cannot. > > > > -nick > > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Amer Mustafa <[email protected]> > > Sender: [email protected] > > Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:35:29 > > To: <[email protected]> > > Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Network Advertisements. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > visit www.ipexpert.com > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > visit www.ipexpert.com > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 18:59:02 -0400 > From: "Di Bias, Steve" <[email protected]> > To: Jason Maynard <[email protected]>, > "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Troubleshooting > Message-ID: > < > 2fe030039b8ad14eb4373ca25779c63e90fccac...@corp-exvs01.corp.uhsinc.biz> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > We are quiet because we are studying, but I like challenges!! > > The first issue I see is that R3 is configured for NBMA while R1 and R2 are > configured to use point-to-multipoint ospf network types. I'm not sure what > the restrictions are but changing the network type should bring up the > neighbor. > > I also do notice a second thing with R2 which has a /30 netmask while R1 > and R3 have /24's. You may run into strange things with this config so if > you change it to match with a /24 you should now have full reachability. > > So IP mismatch and network type mismatch is what I see here... > > Steve > > ________________________________ > From: [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Jason Maynard > Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 2:43 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Troubleshooting > > I have noticed that the study list becomes very quiet at times so I want to > start some discussion to hopefully help all of us stay engaged > > I have started to create a questions around troubleshooting on my blog. You > can lab it up to see all the issues or just look at the configuration to try > to identify all the issues. > > Here is the link > http://packetsanalyzed.blogspot.com/2010/10/troubleshooting-1.html > > > > > Marko/Tyson: if you consider this spam please send me an email and I will > no longer include links to my blog when using OSL. - this is really to help > keep folks engaged and stir up additional discussions and further enhance > the learning experience. > > > > UHS Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any > attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and may > contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, > use, disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited. If this > was sent to you in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and > destroy all copies of the original message. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: </archives/ccie_rs/attachments/20101013/4ea2c1d8/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 19:00:32 -0400 > From: "Di Bias, Steve" <[email protected]> > To: "Di Bias, Steve" <[email protected]>, Jason Maynard > <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Troubleshooting > Message-ID: > < > 2fe030039b8ad14eb4373ca25779c63e90fccac...@corp-exvs01.corp.uhsinc.biz> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Sorry if I ruined that for someone else, next time I will unicast the OG > poster :) > > ________________________________ > From: Di Bias, Steve > Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 3:59 PM > To: 'Jason Maynard'; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Troubleshooting > > We are quiet because we are studying, but I like challenges!! > > The first issue I see is that R3 is configured for NBMA while R1 and R2 are > configured to use point-to-multipoint ospf network types. I'm not sure what > the restrictions are but changing the network type should bring up the > neighbor. > > I also do notice a second thing with R2 which has a /30 netmask while R1 > and R3 have /24's. You may run into strange things with this config so if > you change it to match with a /24 you should now have full reachability. > > So IP mismatch and network type mismatch is what I see here... > > Steve > > ________________________________ > From: [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Jason Maynard > Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 2:43 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Troubleshooting > > I have noticed that the study list becomes very quiet at times so I want to > start some discussion to hopefully help all of us stay engaged > > I have started to create a questions around troubleshooting on my blog. You > can lab it up to see all the issues or just look at the configuration to try > to identify all the issues. > > Here is the link > http://packetsanalyzed.blogspot.com/2010/10/troubleshooting-1.html > > > > > Marko/Tyson: if you consider this spam please send me an email and I will > no longer include links to my blog when using OSL. - this is really to help > keep folks engaged and stir up additional discussions and further enhance > the learning experience. > > > > UHS Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any > attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and may > contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, > use, disclosure or distribution of this information is prohibited. If this > was sent to you in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and > destroy all copies of the original message. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: </archives/ccie_rs/attachments/20101013/8fed449c/attachment.html> > > End of CCIE_RS Digest, Vol 57, Issue 55 > *************************************** >
_______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
