On 9/30/14 3:03 PM, Gary T. Giesen wrote: > No other BGP implementation that I know of supports it. Do you have a > specific reason for wanting to change the BGP port?
the typical rational involves two bgp processes on the same host... listening on a non-default typically means only one side can initiate a connection. > GTG > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Matthias Waehlisch > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> do I see it correctly that the destination port to establish the BGP >> session cannot be changed? >> >> I would really like to have something like >> >> neighbor 1.2.3.4 port 5001 as 64512; >> >> >> Any reason not to support this? >> >> >> >> Thanks >> matthias >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Waehlisch >> . Freie Universitaet Berlin, Inst. fuer Informatik, AG CST >> . Takustr. 9, D-14195 Berlin, Germany >> .. mailto:[email protected] .. http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/~waehl >> :. Also: http://inet.cpt.haw-hamburg.de .. http://www.link-lab.net >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
