<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Rip on Aaron&#39;s Worthless Words</title>
    <link>https://a996c8ee.aww-3cz.pages.dev/tags/rip/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Rip on Aaron&#39;s Worthless Words</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://a996c8ee.aww-3cz.pages.dev/tags/rip/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>ROUTE Notes - Routing IPv6</title>
      <link>https://a996c8ee.aww-3cz.pages.dev/posts/2010/06/route-notes-routing-ipv6/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://a996c8ee.aww-3cz.pages.dev/posts/2010/06/route-notes-routing-ipv6/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Study Questions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;Why would anyone develop a version of RIP that supports IPv6?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;I have no idea.  Boredom, maybe.  Whatever the case, it works just like RIPv2, which is pretty scary.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;In EIGRP for IPv4, there are several requirements for two routers to neighbor up.  Which of those is not true for EIGRP for IPv6?&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The two routers don&amp;rsquo;t need to be in the same subnet.  The concept of the link local address takes care of that need since neighbors always share a common medium like an Ethernet segment or a serial link.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>An Interesting Problem with Multiple DCs on a Stick</title>
      <link>https://a996c8ee.aww-3cz.pages.dev/posts/2009/03/an-interesting-problem-with-multiple-dcs-on-a-stick/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://a996c8ee.aww-3cz.pages.dev/posts/2009/03/an-interesting-problem-with-multiple-dcs-on-a-stick/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;We talked about &lt;a href=&#34;http://aconaway.com/2008/08/12/running-multiple-data-centers-on-a-stick-with-the-csm/&#34; title=&#34;AConaway.com -- Running Multiple Data Centers on a Stick&#34;&gt;running multiple data centers on a stick&lt;/a&gt; back in August, which is where you have multiple logical pairs of client and server VLANs on a single CSM for different tiers or functions.  The big point of the article was that you had to do some fancy forwarding to get a server-initiated connection from one server VLAN to appear out the appropriate client VLAN.  Well, we ran into an interesting issue with the given solution.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ACLs and HSRP, BGP, OSPF, VRRP, GLBP...</title>
      <link>https://a996c8ee.aww-3cz.pages.dev/posts/2008/06/acls-and-hsrp-bgp-ospf-vrrp-glbp/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://a996c8ee.aww-3cz.pages.dev/posts/2008/06/acls-and-hsrp-bgp-ospf-vrrp-glbp/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Here&amp;rsquo;s a handy list of ACL entries to allow your devices to speak routing protocols, availability protocols, and some other stuff. We&amp;rsquo;ll assume you have ACL 101 applied to your Ethernet inbound; your Ethernet has an IP of 192.168.0.1.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;BGP : Runs on TCP/179 between the neighbors&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;access-list 101 permit tcp any host 192.168.0.1 eq 179&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;EIGRP : Runs on its own protocol number from the source interface IP to the multicast address of 224.0.0.10&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;access-list 101 permit eigrp any host 224.0.0.10&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
