EIGRP Not Distributing Remote Routes

Hello, I recently changed our routing protocol to EIGRP and I have a question about why remote routes aren't being communicated across a common switch/router.  I have three Cisco switches (3560s, 3750 in the middle) attached to three different networks.  One is attached to both, and the other two are only attached to the middle switch (believe these are called 'stubs?) - please see the below image for a visual representation.

They are all attached with L3 links as shown in the diagram.  There are more networks attached to R1 and R2 than shown here, but for simplicity's sake I only listed one per.  

I was under the impression that all of the routers that participate in an EIGRP AS would share all of their routes with one another, if even they aren't direct neighbors.  What I'm seeing is that R1 is not getting the network from EIGRP, and R3 is not getting the network.  I had to put in static routes so those networks could talk to one another.  I thought if they are all part of the same AS, then R2 would share those routes with the other routers - neighbor routes getting an AD of 90 and external routes getting a higher AD...170 i think - but I'm not seeing any external routes listed when I do a 'show ip routes eigrp'.  

Here is the config I used to set up EIGRP on each:

R1# eigrp 10
R1# network
R1# no auto-summary

R2# eigrp 10
R2# network
R2# network
R2# no auto-summary

R3# eigrp 10
R3# network
R3# no auto-summary

I used no auto-summary since the network is subnetted as shown in the diagram.  R2 has all of the routes, but I want EIGRP to distribute R3's network to R1, and vice versa.  Pretty sure I shouldn't have to do any redistribution commands since EIGRP should share all of this data.  One more piece of info.  Here is what the configs show regarding EIGRP on each node after inputting the above commands:

router eigrp 10
   no auto-summary

router eigrp 10
   eigrp stub connected summary

router eigrp 10
   eigrp stub connected summary

I'm not sure where that last line on R2 and R3 came from...all I put in was the commands shown above.  If you have questions, want more info, configs, run some commands...just ask.  Though I suspect this will be a simple answer at the end.  Thanks for the help.
Who is Participating?

[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

Jody LemoineNetwork ArchitectCommented:
Take a careful look at the licensing level of the three switches. On newer Catalyst 3750/3560 switches, the IP Services license is required for full EIGRP (not stub) functionality. If you're getting the "eigrp stub connected summary" entry on a switch that you did not configure as a stub, it's very probable that the license in R2 isn't sufficient and is operating as a stub router, which would lead to exactly the behaviour you're describing.

If R1 has the correct license and is running as a full EIGRP router, the most economical approach (assuming the switches have a similar hardware configuration) would be to swap the hardware running R1 and R2.  The R1 and R3 units don't need full functionality and are best configured as stubs anyway. As long as R2 is a full EIGRP router, everything will work as expected.

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
hachempAuthor Commented:
Thanks a lot.  I kept looking at the configs wondering what I was doing wrong, but this makes perfect sense.  They are all running the IPBase version of their software, but R1 is running 12.2(35)SE5 while R2 and R3 are running 12.2(55) SE1.  Cisco must have changed this in between those two versions.  Unfortunately I can't just swap R1 and R2, but at least I know why this isn't working, and can continue to use static routes until I can beg borrow or steal for the $$ to upgrade to an IP Services license.  Thanks!
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Networking Protocols

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.