another RIP timer question (holddown) - cisco doc error?
I know that this question has been asked like millions of times but all of them seem to be missing something. I think there is a big difference in how we think holddown timer should work and how it actually works.
So based on cisco's documentation:
Interval (in seconds) during which routing information regarding better paths is suppressed. It should be at least three times the value of the update argument. A route enters into a holddown state when an update packet is received that indicates the route is unreachable. The route is marked inaccessible and advertised asunreachable. However, the route is still used for forwarding packets.When holddown expires, routes advertised by other sources are acceptedand the route is no longer inaccessible. The default is 180 seconds.
But based on CCIE Routing and Switching Exam Certification Guide, 3rd Edition page 192:
"After the Invalid timer expires (180 seconds) for R1’s route to 172.31.103.0/24, R1 begins a Holddown timer for the route. Holddown starts at (default) 180 seconds, and counts down."
" So what exactly causes holddown to occur? Earlier when we looked atthe invalid timer, we saw the route placed into holddown when theinvalid timer expired. As it turns out, this is the only time that the holddown timer is used."
I see the same results in lab as cisconinja blog post and the CCIE cert guide.
So my question is why does every other document on the web specify that holddown timer is started when a route of higher metric is received?
This is driving me a little crazy and I would like to get to the bottom of it.
Re: another RIP timer question (holddown) - cisco doc error?
I remember one thread created by Nicolas or Petrus some mounths ago that was about the real meaning of the holddown timer. He had done his own tests and his findings were in line with what is written in the CCIE study guide.
He was surprised that he had found this that actually was not present in previous forum threads.
I can only say as a partial justification of this lack of knowedge that RIP is not used often nowdays.
Also the implementation of Cisco RIP may be different in this aspect from that described in the original Bell-Ford algorithm.
Probably in another implementation a single holddown timer that is 6-7 times the update interval is enough instead of having flush timer, invalid timer and holddown timer. Take this is as a qualitative guess because I cannot find at the moment a comparison between Cisco implementation and other vendor implementations.
Actually, in RFC 1058 that describes RIPv1 it speaks of marking a route as invalid but it doesn't mention an invalid timer
If we don't hear from G for 180 seconds, we can assume that either the gateway has crashed or the network connecting us to it has become unusable. Thus, we mark the route as invalid. When we hear from another neighbor that has a valid route to N, the valid route will replace the invalid one. Note that we wait for 180 seconds before timing out a route even though we expect to hear from
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...