BGP Question...?? [7:66919]
Hi All, I am trying to better understand a particular BGP scenario, thought someone might shed some light. This is probably very simple, i am just missing the punchline. If you have 2 routers, one let's say running in AS100 the other running in AS200, and you had to EBGP peer with 128.1.1.254 from AS100 router. You were required to use the Ethernet0/0 ip on AS100 router for peering 128.1.2.3, would you configure your neighbor statment pointing to 128.1.1.254 and update the source to Ethernet 0/0?,(I tried this and was no good) even after a debug ip bgp. I think maybe a secondary address 128.1.1.253 on the ethernet might be a way to go. Basically, 128.1.1.254 is a route generator that I would need to peer with in order to recieve several external routes. I dont have any configs to post at the moment, but just trying to get an outside opinion. Thanks, Static0101 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66919t=66919 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BGP Question...?? [7:66919]
unless the peers are on the same segment, you also need the neighbor ebgp-multihop command configured on both routers. HTH -- - Bullwinkle: Hey, Rocky, watch me pull a CCIE out of my hat! Rocky: Bullwinkle, that trick NEVER works Bullwinkle: This time FOR SURE!!! ( pulls Rocky out of hat ) Well, I'm getting closer! Salvatore De Luca wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi All, I am trying to better understand a particular BGP scenario, thought someone might shed some light. This is probably very simple, i am just missing the punchline. If you have 2 routers, one let's say running in AS100 the other running in AS200, and you had to EBGP peer with 128.1.1.254 from AS100 router. You were required to use the Ethernet0/0 ip on AS100 router for peering 128.1.2.3, would you configure your neighbor statment pointing to 128.1.1.254 and update the source to Ethernet 0/0?,(I tried this and was no good) even after a debug ip bgp. I think maybe a secondary address 128.1.1.253 on the ethernet might be a way to go. Basically, 128.1.1.254 is a route generator that I would need to peer with in order to recieve several external routes. I dont have any configs to post at the moment, but just trying to get an outside opinion. Thanks, Static0101 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66926t=66919 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BGP Question...?? [7:66919]
At 03:46 PM 4/5/2003 +, Salvatore De Luca wrote: Hi All, I am trying to better understand a particular BGP scenario, thought someone might shed some light. This is probably very simple, i am just missing the punchline. If you have 2 routers, one let's say running in AS100 the other running in AS200, and you had to EBGP peer with 128.1.1.254 from AS100 router. You were required to use the Ethernet0/0 ip on AS100 router for peering 128.1.2.3, would you configure your neighbor statment pointing to 128.1.1.254 and update the source to Ethernet 0/0?,(I tried this and was no good) even after a debug ip bgp. I think maybe a secondary address 128.1.1.253 on the ethernet might be a way to go. Basically, 128.1.1.254 is a route generator that I would need to peer with in order to recieve several external routes. I dont have any configs to post at the moment, but just trying to get an outside opinion. There isn't enough info here to answer this. Is 128.1.1.254 on the other side of the Ethernet? (ie the next is 128.1.0.0/22)? Likely not I expect. If not, you need to use EBGP multihop which will allow the EBGP packets to move out farther than 1 link (changes the TTL in the packet from 1 to whatever you set it to) Furthermore, is the 128.1.1.254 configured to peer with 128.1.2.3? If not, you'll need to use update source to set your side of the connection to the appropriate address. If 128.1.2.3 is a secondary, that this would likely need to be used as well. However, is 128.1.2.3 is the primary address on the eth0 and the eth0 is the closest link on your router toward 128.1.1.254 and 128.1.1.254 is set to peer with 128.1.2.3, than you should just be able to set multi-hop with an appropriate TTL and be on your way. Also watch for BGP authentication in case it is required. Pete Thanks, Static0101 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66937t=66919 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: BGP Question...?? [7:66919]
You are both right.. but the problem scenario does'nt give you that mutch info.. I am trying to deduce all and any ways of going about possible peering 128.1.1.254. The scenario does not specify if it is a directly connected peer on the lan segment. That is why I tried updating the source to the Ethernet first 128.1.2.3 which did not work. You can peer with secondary addresses with BGP, but I dont think that's what they are asking for. Since the information is limited with just Address 128.1.2.3 should be used for peering with 128.1.1.254. I thought this was a bit vauge, but since I dont know exactly how many hops 128.1.1.254 is: neighbor 128.1.1.254 ebgp-multihop 255 will have to do. The thing that threw me off was when it stated to use the Ethernet ip address 128.1.2.3 for peering?? Thanks for the feedback... Sal Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66939t=66919 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
