You're absolutely correct! :-) I did not RTFM, and I soon discovered
that I should have. But, I just removed that statement since it really
wasn't necessary. I was just playing around and got burned. As
you can tell, I still have not RTFM about that particular command since
I did not know there was a "warning-only" keyword.
The moral of the story? RTFM!! ;-) (Can you tell I love that
acronym?)
John
>>> "dre" 8/7/01 4:34:20 PM >>>
maybe you forgot to RTFM and missed that
"warning-only" part. Check it again ;>
Of course, it may have been a good thing
if you were to get the entirety of the IPv4
prefixes as /32's from your peer. I bet
you wouldn't like that. I think I'd rather
have the session go down.
-dre
""John Neiberger"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> When I tried this method, there was a time when our provider
> accidentally sent too many prefixes and it hit the maximum limit
which
> shutdown the session. I had to manually restart the session, and I
> wouldn't consider that to be a good thing.
>
> My $.02
> John
>
> >>> "dre" 8/7/01 1:37:17 PM >>>
> neighbor maximum-prefix
>
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/ip_r
>
> /iprprt2/1rdbgp.htm#xtocid142343
>
> -dre
>
> ""Chris"" wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I was told that there is a criteria to set BGP alarms so that when
> the
> > routing table reaches a certain number of routes, you get
> notification,
> > does anyone know the answer to this question
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Chris
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=15183&t=15148
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
