02-26-2008 10:20 AM - edited 03-05-2019 09:23 PM
Hi,
Does the 'neighbor' command under eigrp send a unicast request to the neighbor as opposed to the multicast address 224.0.0.10 ?
Regards,
Phil.
Solved! Go to Solution.
02-26-2008 10:29 AM
yep. Here is more information regarding the neighbor command if interested.
02-26-2008 10:31 AM
Hi Phil,
That's correct.
See my debug below
Rack1R2#
*Mar 1 00:05:09.923: IP: s=192.168.12.2 (local), d=224.0.0.10 (Serial1/0), len 60, sending broad/multicast
Rack1R2#
Rack1R2(config)#router eigrp 1
Rack1R2(config-router)#neighbor 192.168.12.1 Serial1/0
Rack1R2(config-router)#end
Rack1R2#
*Mar 1 00:06:27.283: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), routed via RIB
*Mar 1 00:06:27.287: IP: s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), len 60, rcvd 3
*Mar 1 00:06:28.215: IP: s=192.168.12.2 (local), d=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), len 60, sending
*Mar 1 00:06:28.291: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), routed via RIB
*Mar 1 00:06:28.295: IP: s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), len 60, rcvd 3
*Mar 1 00:06:28.303: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 1: Neighbor 192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0) is up: new adjacency
*Mar 1 00:06:28.307: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), routed via RIB
*Mar 1 00:06:28.311: IP: s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), len 40, rcvd 3
*Mar 1 00:06:28.319: IP: s=192.168.12.2 (local), d=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), len 60, sending
*Mar 1 00:06:28.327: IP: s=192.168.12.2 (local), d=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/
Rack1R2#0), len 40, sending
*Mar 1 00:06:28.419: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), routed via RIB
*Mar 1 00:06:28.423: IP: s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), len 40, rcvd 3
*Mar 1 00:06:28.435: IP: s=192.168.12.2 (local), d=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), len 40, sending
*Mar 1 00:06:28.507: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), routed via RIB
*Mar 1 00:06:28.511: IP: s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), len 40, rcvd 3
HTH,
__
Edison.
02-26-2008 10:29 AM
Yes.
02-26-2008 10:29 AM
yep. Here is more information regarding the neighbor command if interested.
02-26-2008 10:31 AM
Hi Phil,
That's correct.
See my debug below
Rack1R2#
*Mar 1 00:05:09.923: IP: s=192.168.12.2 (local), d=224.0.0.10 (Serial1/0), len 60, sending broad/multicast
Rack1R2#
Rack1R2(config)#router eigrp 1
Rack1R2(config-router)#neighbor 192.168.12.1 Serial1/0
Rack1R2(config-router)#end
Rack1R2#
*Mar 1 00:06:27.283: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), routed via RIB
*Mar 1 00:06:27.287: IP: s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), len 60, rcvd 3
*Mar 1 00:06:28.215: IP: s=192.168.12.2 (local), d=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), len 60, sending
*Mar 1 00:06:28.291: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), routed via RIB
*Mar 1 00:06:28.295: IP: s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), len 60, rcvd 3
*Mar 1 00:06:28.303: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 1: Neighbor 192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0) is up: new adjacency
*Mar 1 00:06:28.307: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), routed via RIB
*Mar 1 00:06:28.311: IP: s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), len 40, rcvd 3
*Mar 1 00:06:28.319: IP: s=192.168.12.2 (local), d=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), len 60, sending
*Mar 1 00:06:28.327: IP: s=192.168.12.2 (local), d=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/
Rack1R2#0), len 40, sending
*Mar 1 00:06:28.419: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), routed via RIB
*Mar 1 00:06:28.423: IP: s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), len 40, rcvd 3
*Mar 1 00:06:28.435: IP: s=192.168.12.2 (local), d=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), len 40, sending
*Mar 1 00:06:28.507: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), routed via RIB
*Mar 1 00:06:28.511: IP: s=192.168.12.1 (Serial1/0), d=192.168.12.2 (Serial1/0), len 40, rcvd 3
HTH,
__
Edison.
02-27-2008 12:22 AM
Yes it does. Unlike RIP, setting a static neighbor in EIGRP will inhibit the multicast. RIP with a static neighbor will continue to send a multicast as well.
OTOH, the behavior of passive-interface is different in RIP than in EIGRP.
I investigated this recently and wrote a short piece about it in my blog, if you are interested:
http://dorreke.wordpress.com/2008/02/11/static-neighbors/
Kevin Dorrell
Luxembourg
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide