Is my understanding correct as i outlined in the 2 bullet points? Also the remove-private-as is for out going updates correct?
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Dwann Hall <[email protected]> wrote: > ISP supporting colo environments via eBGP w/ private AS would be a > good place to use the remove-private-as. -d > > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:12 PM, Aaron Moreck <[email protected]> wrote: > > I am struggling to see the the use of this command. Here is my > > understanding, please correct me if I am wrong > > > > 1.) When you use confederations, the Sub AS's are removed from the AS > > path when advertising to eBGP peers. If Sub AS's are private then they > wont > > be seen by the eBGP neighbor by default. > > 2.) The "remove-private-as" does not remove the private AS if there are > > non-private AS's already in the AS Path. For example if the AS Path was > > (123 7018 65055) and 65055 was the AS of the router advertising to > EBGP > > with the remove-private-as option, it would NOT remove the 65055 because > of > > the 123 and 7018 present in the AS PATH. > > > > So my question is in what circumstance would the remove-private-as be > > useful? > > > > Thanks > > > > Aaron > > _______________________________________________ > > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > visit www.ipexpert.com > > > > Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out > www.PlatinumPlacement.com > > > _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com
