We discovered something on the CCIE list recently and I'm wondering if anyone might be able to explain the reasoning behing this behavior.
BGP synchronization rules require that if an iBGP peer is to advertise a route learned via iBGP, it must have that prefix *and* the next hop for that route in the routing table already. An interesting added complexity to this occurs if your IGP is OSPF. If the router in question has learned these prefixes via OSPF, then the advertising router ID in the OSPF database must match the router ID of the iBGP peer that advertised the route. Has this behavior caused any problems for any of you? Do you know why the synchronization rules have a special case for OSPF and not other routing protocols? I was working with someone else on a practice lab and we ran into this issue. We were both going nuts trying to figure out why the iBGP routes weren't synchronizing and this turned out to be the cause. Any thoughts? Thanks, John ________________________________________________ Get your own "800" number Voicemail, fax, email, and a lot more http://www.ureach.com/reg/tag Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=30126&t=30126 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
