networker050184 wrote: » What happens if you want an interfaces network to be advertised in OSPF but you don't want to form neighbors out of that interface? For instance a network that has just hosts.
Nans wrote: » Is that what you were saying.!!
Mooseboost wrote: » Lets say we only have hosts out of that interface, but we want to advertise them. Now, Now lets say we don't use passive interface and we don't have any authentication set for neighbor relationships.. Now we have network savy Bob who loves chaos. He uses wireshark to capture what he needs and hooks up a router and starts doing some crazy business. Essentially, passive-interface allows us to bring those hosts into the network without risking any rogue neighbors forming either by intention or accident. If we know that no neighbors should be out of that interface, then we don't need to have hellos going out or acknowledge hellos on that interface.
Deathmage wrote: » This is something I've always wondered but is so far above the scope of the CCNA, but could you apply the passive-interface on an interface linking another router or OSPF area to make stub networks? IE: core network in a triangle '3-router' network in say AREA 0 and then a distro layer with L3 switches in say AREA 1, could you essentially use the interfaces that link the routers to the L3 switches with passive-interfaces to block LSA advertisements? I'd just do static routing between the core and distro layers, just curious if this concept could be applied in that manner too or if there is a concept I haven't learn yet for multi area OSPF.
Deathmage wrote: » or if there is a concept I haven't learn yet for multi area OSPF.
networker050184 wrote: » What you'd be doing there is creating two separate OSPF domains with static routing between them. So yeah, technically you could do that, but I don't know why you'd ever want to. OSPF has built in mechanisms for lowering LSA counts in areas when need be. No need to reinvent the wheel.
_Gonzalo_ wrote: » Well, there are areas for OSPF. These are similar to having two separated AS in EIGRP. And they are (as was pointed out in previous posts) mechanisms to control LSA through area configuration. Though it is creative, you would not do that static routing and independent OSPFs solution because you would negate the advantage of a dynamic routing protocol... Also, if you are saying that you would apply that in a campus design between core and distribution, you do not fully understand campus designs or dynamic routing. Do not misunderstand me, it´s all right. CCNA only covers certain topics superficially. In CCNP you will connect a lot of dots regarding that, so just keep going!
Deathmage wrote: » Like for instance, the lab I posted on Saturday in my CCENT in two days post, I know I aimed to make a Campus Design but it's essential still a Area 0 network after looking at it on my flowchart, so it doesn't really work as how I hoped but it's all good I know I still have stuff to learn above CCNA content.
Deathmage wrote: » Can't help a guy for wondering though.