cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
631
Views
0
Helpful
4
Replies

eigrp neighbor command ?

philipbarker
Level 1
Level 1

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.

2 Accepted Solutions

Accepted Solutions

adam.sellhorn
Level 4
Level 4

yep. Here is more information regarding the neighbor command if interested.

http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/103/eigrpfaq.shtml#ten

View solution in original post

Edison Ortiz
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame

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.

View solution in original post

4 Replies 4

jorgenolla
Level 1
Level 1

Yes.

adam.sellhorn
Level 4
Level 4

yep. Here is more information regarding the neighbor command if interested.

http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/103/eigrpfaq.shtml#ten

Edison Ortiz
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame

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.

Kevin Dorrell
Level 10
Level 10

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

Getting Started

Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community:

Review Cisco Networking products for a $25 gift card