"Neighbor x.x.x.x remote-as yyy" is a peering statement. If you are unclear as what the proctor considers a "peering statement", that would be time to get clarification.
I would not consider setting route-maps, distribute-lists, update source, or ebgp multihop as "peering statements" With multiple paths in the network, loopback peering will provide more stability. The point of the section is to get you to not use a full mesh for the ibgp peerings. Marvin Greenlee, CCIE #12237 (R&S, SP, Sec) Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc. Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 Fax: +1.810.454.0130 Mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Progress or excuses, which one are you making? -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Suresh Mishra Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 4:56 PM To: OSL CCIE Routing and Switching Lab Exam Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Vol2 -LAB8 - BGP task 4.1 Hello all, There is question in this section that says "Configure R5 to peer to R6. Use single peering statement. This peering should be as stable as possible". The answer to this question in the proctor guide has peering configured between the loopback addresses of the two ebgp peers which requires three statements. I think that should be changed to include one statement by using the physical link addresses between the two peers or change the question to not have the requirement of stable connection. If there is a need for stable connection then we need to remove the restriction of single statement as it is possible to peer in a single statement in BGP using direct link addresses. Thanks Suresh
