We're Sorry, Full Content Access is for Members Only...

If you like to keep on reading, Become a Member Now! Here is Why:

  • Learn any CCNA, CCNP and CCIE R&S Topic. Explained As Simple As Possible.
  • Try for Just $1. The Best Dollar You've Ever Spent on Your Cisco Career!
  • Full Access to our 581 Lessons. More Lessons Added Every Week!
  • Content created by Rene Molenaar (CCIE #41726)

 

295 New Members signed up the last 30 days!

satisfaction-guaranteed

100% Satisfaction Guaranteed!
You may cancel your monthly membership at any time.
No Questions Asked!

Tags:


Forum Replies

  1. awesome lesson. just a question rene, when we activate the RIP under the interface it does 2 things

    Activate the prefix on the interface in RIPNG.
    Send RIPNG updates out of this interface.

    do we have a passive interface on this? is this the same as RIP or any routing protocol in IPv4 that if the interface is going to your LAN network, it is much better not to Send Routing updates to that interface. We suppressed it by using Passive Interface so that we will only advertise the network on that interface. This is for security purposes right?

    Thank you!

  2. Hi John,

    Good question, the behavior of RIPng is the same as RIP for IPv4. The funny part though is that there is no "passive interface" command for RIPng.

    To simulate the same behavior of the passive interface command you can use one of the following two methods:

    1) Don't enable RIPng on the interface that should be made passive but use "redistribute connect" instead.

    2) Use a prefix-list to filter RIPng advertisements on the interface that should be passive.

    It's a bit lame and I don't know why passive interface isn't supported, but this gets you the same result :slight_smile:

    Rene

  3. Hi Rene

    Just a question, more of a general IPV6 question, why does a loopback interface generate the same link-local address as the physical interface. Yes I understand that the loopback don't have it's own mac address and will use the physical interface, but why doesn't it cause a conflict on the local device, I was under the impression the link-local address must be unique on the llocal device:

    R8#sh ipv6 int brief
    Em0/0                  [administratively down/down]
        unassigned
    GigabitEthernet0/0     [up/up]
        FE80::6273:5CFF:FEF8:D8E0
    GigabitEthernet0/1     [up/up]
        unassigned
    Serial0/0/0            [down/down]
        unassigned
    Loopback0              [up/up]
        FE80::6273:5CFF:FEF8:D8E0
        2001:DB8::1
  4. Hi Casper,

    These link-local addresses are only valid on the link and unroutable so that's why it is no problem to have the same address on multiple interfaces.

    Rene

Ask a question or join the discussion by visiting our Community Forum