I'm tempted to go find two spare routers and set this up to test it. I was under the impression that passive-interface stopped all routing protocol traffic with OSPF, including hellos. What's the point in sending hellos if the interface is passive?
Interesting...I think I'll go scrounge up a couple of routers. :-) If I'm able to do this at work I'll let you know how it turns out. John >>> Tshon 3/15/02 1:16:51 PM >>> I have no way of testing this, but the understanding that I have is that, Passive-interface stops the processing of routing updates....but doesn't stop Hello's from being advertised out that interface Yet the database-filter will not allow neighborships from being formed So you might have the passive-interface but hello's are still being sent out that interface, If someone could check this.... with a passive-interface turn on ospf debug John Neiberger wrote: >There are two related commands that prevent flooding of OSPF LSAs: > >ospf database-filter all out >neighbor a.b.c.d database-filter all out > >I'm curious about how precise they're being with the word 'flooding'. >Will this command stop *all* LSAs or does it simply filter out the >periodic flooding of LSAs roughly every 30 minutes? > >Again, I don't have a way to test this at work at the moment and I >can't find a better explanation on CCO, at least so far. > >It seems to me that if it stops all LSAs, there's not too much >difference between that and the passive-interface command. The command >references specifically use the word 'flooding' so at this point I'm >thinking they are only referring to the periodic flooding of LSAs and >not the other types of LSA exchanges. > >Regards, >John Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=38467&t=38431 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
