I don't see what that would gain... if floating statics are in use, then there's no reason to run ospf over the interface. Passive interface prevents an OSPF adjacency from ever forming, since the interface can't send out LSA's. Since floating statics are usually frowned upon in in lab scenarios, that may not be an option.
According to CCO, only one end of an OSPF circuit needs to have the demand-circuit command. Problems result of one end of the circuit doesn't support the demand-circuit command (IOS older than 11.2). Check out http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/104/dcprob.html for other possibilites (watch the wrap). -----Original Message----- From: timothy thielen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 9:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: OSPF over ISDN demand circuit [7:42348] If one wishes for routing updates to bring up the link, can one not just use the "passive-interface" command on the ISDN interface? If it is a backup link, passive interface will keep routing updates will keep the link from coming up for updates. Then a couple of floating static routes on either end should bring it up if the primary (dynamic)link goes down as long as the administrative distance for the floaters are greater then that of OSPF. --Tim Ruihai An wrote: > > Hi, Group, > > On an ISDN circuit running ospf , if I want to use "ip ospf > demand-circuit" > to keep it from being brought up by ospf update, do I need to > define > 224.0.0.5 as non-interesting traffic in dialer-list? > > I have configured "ip ospf demand-circuit" on one side of the > ISDN, but > routing update to 224.0.0.5 keeps activating the circuit? What > is the > problem? > > Thanks > > Ruihai Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=42445&t=42348 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
