I'm chewing on my BSCN studies, any help appreciated.
BSCN book (Paquet/Teare, p. 254, last paragraph), "The topology table
contains all destinations advertised by the neighboring routers. The show ip
eigrp topology all-links command displays all the IP entries in the topology
table. The show ip eigrp topology command displays only the successor and
feasible successor for IP routes."
Real world production environment output from these commands (names and such
altered to protect the guilty). I've chosen 1 network from the output for
the example.
ReallyBigHost#sh ip ei top
IP-EIGRP Topology Table for AS(15)/ID(10.15.8.51)
Codes: P - Passive, A - Active, U - Update, Q - Query, R - Reply,
r - Reply status
P 10.1.55.60/30, 1 successors, FD is 6026496
via 10.5.8.52 (6026496/6023936), FastEthernet0/0
BigHost1#sh ip ei top all
P 10.1.55.60/30, 1 successors, FD is 6026496, serno 4232337
via 10.5.8.52 (6026496/6023936), FastEthernet0/0
via 10.2.54.66 (161536000/161024000), Serial2/2:0.245
via 10.2.55.2 (41536000/41024000), Serial2/2:0.323
via 10.2.54.78 (41536000/41024000), Serial2/2:0.248
via 10.2.54.70 (21536000/21024000), Serial2/2:0.246
Codes: P - Passive, A - Active, U - Update, Q - Query, R - Reply,
r - Reply status
My questions: Where are the feasible successors in the output from sh ip ei
top? There is one very obvious FS candidate in the topology all listing --
(21536000/21024000) on Serial2/2:0.246 is a better metric than anything but
fa0/0. Is this an error in the Cisco book, or am I missing something? Is
there some way to get the router to display the FS? Or doesn't this router
think there IS an FS (and if so, why not)?
Related bonus question: How on earth is THIS possible? (Again, real world
output):
ReallyBigHost#sh ip ei top all
P 10.1.37.44/30, 1 successors, FD is 4357120, serno 3900620
via 10.1.36.2 (4357120/3845120), Serial2/2:0.28
via 10.1.36.2 (4382720/3870720), Serial2/2:0.28
How can there be two different metrics for the same destination via the same
neighbor if the route is passive? The K values in this network are set to
the defaults, so it's not a matter of the load or reliability changing and
rejiggering the metric ... and even in that case, why would the router keep
both metrics instead of the newest one?
Puzzled and such,
doctorcisco
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=4363&t=4363
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
