<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>ZZTopping &#187; cisco vrf passive-interface eigrp router switch</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.zztopping.com/tag/cisco-vrf-passive-interface-eigrp-router-switch/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.zztopping.com</link>
	<description>A Blog by a Non-Blogger</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 02:25:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Cisco Passive Interface Address-Family Warning</title>
		<link>http://blog.zztopping.com/2009/08/24/cisco-passive-interface-address-family-warning/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.zztopping.com/2009/08/24/cisco-passive-interface-address-family-warning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 03:06:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ZZTopping</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Networking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cisco vrf passive-interface eigrp router switch]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.zztopping.com/?p=85</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When you are configuring passive interfaces for the global VRF as well as other configured address-families, there is a difference between how the 12.4/12.4T Router IOS behaves and how a 6500/3750/3560 behaves. If you don&#8217;t know what a passive interface is, this post isnt for you, but here is a step in the right direction. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When you are configuring passive interfaces for the global VRF as well as other configured address-families, there is a difference between how the 12.4/12.4T Router IOS behaves and how a 6500/3750/3560 behaves. If you don&#8217;t know what a passive interface is, this post isnt for you, but <a href="http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a0080093f0a.shtml">here is a step in the right direction</a>.</p>
<p>On Routers, passive-interface settings are shared amongst ALL ADDRESS-FAMILIES, INCLUDING GLOBAL. While on the 3560/3750/6500 etc L3 Switch IOS, the address-families each have their own unique passive interface settings.</p>
<p>For instance:</p>
<pre>router eigrp 1
 network 10.0.0.0
 no auto-summary
 passive-interface default
 !
 address-family ipv4 vrf VRF-A
  network 10.0.0.0
  no auto-summary
 exit-address-family
 !
 address-family ipv4 vrf VRF-B
  network 10.0.0.0
  no auto-summary
 exit-address-family
end
</pre>
<p>The above code snippet on a Cisco Router would cause no EIGRP neighbor relationships to form, in either VRF or the global route table. However, on a Cisco L3 switch, the passive-interface command would ONLY apply to the global route table and each VRF will not have any of its member interfaces be acting as passive.</p>
<p>This final code snippet is not valid on a Router IOS, but is perfectly valid(and desired) on a L3 Switch IOS, with Po1 in the global route table, Po2 in VRF-A, and Po3 in VRF-B:</p>
<pre>router eigrp 1
 network 10.0.0.0
 no auto-summary
 passive-interface default
 no passive-interface Po1
 !
 address-family ipv4 vrf VRF-A
  network 10.0.0.0
  no auto-summary
  passive-interface default
  no passive-itnerface Po2
 exit-address-family
 !
 address-family ipv4 vrf VRF-B
  network 10.0.0.0
  no auto-summary
  passive-interface default
  no passive-interface Po3
 exit-address-family
end
</pre>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.zztopping.com/2009/08/24/cisco-passive-interface-address-family-warning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

