cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
783
Views
0
Helpful
2
Replies

EIGRP ROUTE SELECTION.

Ramirov
Level 1
Level 1

Hi guys , I have a simple question , which is the best way to prefer a router over another route , for example in this scenario.

             g0/0----------------g0/0

SW1(L3)                                          R2

             g0/1----------------g0/1

 

R2#sh ip eigrp neighbors

IP-EIGRP neighbors for process 100

H Address Interface Hold Uptime SRTT RTO Q Seq

(sec) (ms) Cnt Num

0 1.1.1.1 Gig0/0 14 00:20:53 40 1000 0 75

1 2.2.2.1 Gig0/1 13 00:20:39 40 1000 0 73

 

D 192.168.1.1/32 [90/130816] via 1.1.1.1, 00:07:44, GigabitEthernet0/0

                             [90/130816] via 2.2.2.1, 00:07:44, GigabitEthernet0/1

 

So I want to use just one path to reach 192.168.1.1 , I read that the best way is modified the interface delay parameter , but I think that is the best way if you have two devices to the same destination.

The only method that I tried was modified AD on R2 .

distance 91 1.1.1.1 0.0.0.0  

Its works , but I dont know if this is the best way .. .....

 

Thanksssss in advance.

1 Accepted Solution

Accepted Solutions

Giuseppe Larosa
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame

Hello Ramirov,

 changing the AD has effects only on the local router.

If there are other routers behind R2 downstream they still see two equal cost paths.

 

if you change the interface delay on one interface on R2 side you should achieve the same result  (or not)

 

Alternatively you can use offset-lists to add delay to some routes on R2 on some selected routes.

This would allow you to perform some form of per prefix load sharing.

 

for different alternatives see the following document

 

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/enhanced-interior-gateway-routing-protocol-eigrp/13673-14.pdf?dtid=osscdc000283

 

Hope to help

Giuseppe

 

View solution in original post

2 Replies 2

Giuseppe Larosa
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame

Hello Ramirov,

 changing the AD has effects only on the local router.

If there are other routers behind R2 downstream they still see two equal cost paths.

 

if you change the interface delay on one interface on R2 side you should achieve the same result  (or not)

 

Alternatively you can use offset-lists to add delay to some routes on R2 on some selected routes.

This would allow you to perform some form of per prefix load sharing.

 

for different alternatives see the following document

 

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/enhanced-interior-gateway-routing-protocol-eigrp/13673-14.pdf?dtid=osscdc000283

 

Hope to help

Giuseppe

 

You are right ! thanks !