Hi Hans On Wed, 06 Mar 2013, Hans van Kranenburg wrote:
> I assume you mean to say a.b.1.0/24 instead of a.b.0.1/24? Yes, sorry. > If there a specific need for advertising the routes you want to send to > your eBGP peer also via iBGP? There's no need to send them via iBGP, but since the iBGP session learns from the central BGP table (t_bgp), it ends up learning them. Is the best solution to create an import filter in the iBGP session, ignoring those prefixes? I was wondering about the behavior difference vs Quagga, where I don't have any iBGP filters but those routes are not learned in the iBGP session. Could this be a consequence of using "gateway direct;" in the iBGP session? Thanks a lot, Andre
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
