So, in this case, if I implement "no ipx split-horizon eigrp", this will only ensure your routing table being correct, which means you will have all the routes even if you network is partially meshed.
But the correct routing table does not ensure the packet being forwarded properly, when a packet received on a hub router multipoint interface, it will not be forwarded to other spoke router. Because of this, ipx doesn't allow you to implement a multipoint interface with partial mesh. Am I correct to say that?
I would think that the risk of not routing packets would exist if you didn't disable split horizon (how would spoke A learn of spoke B, etc?). But I guess in this case you just have to live with the slight risk of a routing loop every now and then. But count to infinity would deal with that I suspect.
But isn't the whole premise a little suspicious. Is there something preventing the use of p-t-p subinterfaces?
Hi everyone, I would like to thank you in advance for any help you can provide a newcomer like myself!
Im studying the 100-105 book by Odom and am currently on the topic of Port security. I purchased a used 2960 and I'm trying to follow a...
While deploying a number of 18xx/2802/3802 model access points (APs), which run AP-COS as their operating platform. It can be observed on some occasions that while many of their access points were able to join the fabric WLC withou...
I am going to design and build an LAN network under a tunnel underground with long distance between the switches.
I will have 2 Catalyst switches and 8 Industrial IE3000, and they will be connected with fiber.
For now I am planning on use Layer-2 s...