Thanks Priscilla. I thought that would be the case. In fact, digging around a bit more, I'm not even sure if a triggered update would be sent. 'clear ipx route *' causes RIP/SAP general requests on all IPX interfaces, according to the command reference. But I think that would just cause RT2 to send its routes (and SAPs) to RT1 - I assume RT2 wouldn't also send them to RT3, and RT1 wouldn't send out an update saying it's lost all it's routes?!
I haven't found any doco that goes into IPX RIP in such gory detail, though! All the stuff I've seen barely even mentions the existence of triggered updates, let alone the details of exactly when they are sent :-( JMcL Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote: > > Triggered updates on IPX RIP are stupid compared to something > like EIGRP. > They just get sent out by a router that brings a route up or > notices that > one goes down. They don't get propagated. More than one router > might decide > a route is up or down, but not necessarily, depending on timing. > > As you know I'm sure, IPX routes are marked invalid if no > routing updates > are heard within three times the value of the update interval > and are > advertised with a metric of infinity. IPX routes are removed > from the > routing table if no routing updates are heard within four times > the value > of the update interval. > > I think RT2 in your case would wait 15 minutes to mark a route > from RT1 > invalid. In the meantime, RT2 is still sending RIPs every 60 > seconds out to > RT3 with the routes from RT1 still valid. So, I would say that > the > triggered update from RT1 would not cause any extra traffic on > the > RT2---RT3 link or on the RT3---RT4 link. > > You can configure the interval at which a network RIP entry > ages out, by > the way, with the ipx rip-multiplier command. That could > confuse matters.... > > Sorry I don't have any more experience to share. Good luck. I'm > sorry > you're having a bad week. We're learning from your experiences > too, if that > helps at all. ;-] > > Priscilla > > At 01:36 AM 10/30/01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >OK, I'm asking a few more questions than I'm answering lately. > > > >Question about IPX RIP (not IP RIP - although they may work > the same way in > >this instance). > > > >Say I have the following setup... > > > >RT1---RT2---RT3---RT4 > > > >The RT2 to RT3 link is ethernet, the others are serial, > although I'm not > >sure that that makes a difference. The IPX RIP update time is > set to five > >minutes on the RT1 to RT2 link, and defaults (to 60 seconds) > on the other > >two links - again, I'm not sure that this makes a difference. > There are no > >relevant filters in this scenario. > > > >If the IPX routes are cleared on RT1 (clear ipx route *), how > far will > >triggered RIP updates/changes be propagated? Will any extra > traffic (above > >normal RIP updates) be created from RT3 to RT4? > > > >Thanks, > >JMcL > ________________________ > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > http://www.priscilla.com > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=24724&t=24621 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
