Re: admin distance question [7:47147]
Great article. I'm studying for CCNP routingwas looking for real world/case study examples. This will be very helpful. Thanks! Dain. ""Darren Ward"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > There is of course an exception to this rule :) > > BGP Backdoor makes an external route go to an admin distance of 200 so IGP > routes take precedence without having to change the eBGP distance. > > Case Study at: > http://www.cisco.com/warp/customer/459/14.html#A14.0 > > Darren Ward > (PGradCS, CCIE #8245, CCNP, CCDP, MCP) > > > On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Dain Deutschman wrote: > > > If the intent is to route the packets to the external AS, then the eBGP > > route would be the most favorable because more likely than not...eBGP is > the > > routing protocol between autonomous systems. In other words/for > example...if > > there is more than 1 route to 10.0.0.0/16, which is a network in an > external > > AS, then the eBGP route should be the prefered route ( since it is an > > external AS ). If the network were in the same AS, then an IGP route should > > be used but...it wouldn't be in the same AS if it was learned via eBGP. Am > I > > making sense? Someone please jump in or correct me if I am wrong. > > Thanks...Dain. > > ""bergenpeak"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > Looking at the administrative distance values for the different > > > routing mechanisms. > > > > > > Why would eBGP have a lower admin distance for a route than > > > if learned via an IGP (like OSPF or ISIS)? Why wouldn't > > > the default behavior be to prefer routes learned from the local > > > IGP rather than via eBGP? > > > > > > THanks Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=47274&t=47147 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: admin distance question [7:47147]
There is of course an exception to this rule :) BGP Backdoor makes an external route go to an admin distance of 200 so IGP routes take precedence without having to change the eBGP distance. Case Study at: http://www.cisco.com/warp/customer/459/14.html#A14.0 Darren Ward (PGradCS, CCIE #8245, CCNP, CCDP, MCP) On Sun, 23 Jun 2002, Dain Deutschman wrote: > If the intent is to route the packets to the external AS, then the eBGP > route would be the most favorable because more likely than not...eBGP is the > routing protocol between autonomous systems. In other words/for example...if > there is more than 1 route to 10.0.0.0/16, which is a network in an external > AS, then the eBGP route should be the prefered route ( since it is an > external AS ). If the network were in the same AS, then an IGP route should > be used but...it wouldn't be in the same AS if it was learned via eBGP. Am I > making sense? Someone please jump in or correct me if I am wrong. > Thanks...Dain. > ""bergenpeak"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > Looking at the administrative distance values for the different > > routing mechanisms. > > > > Why would eBGP have a lower admin distance for a route than > > if learned via an IGP (like OSPF or ISIS)? Why wouldn't > > the default behavior be to prefer routes learned from the local > > IGP rather than via eBGP? > > > > THanks Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=47271&t=47147 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: admin distance question [7:47147]
If the intent is to route the packets to the external AS, then the eBGP route would be the most favorable because more likely than not...eBGP is the routing protocol between autonomous systems. In other words/for example...if there is more than 1 route to 10.0.0.0/16, which is a network in an external AS, then the eBGP route should be the prefered route ( since it is an external AS ). If the network were in the same AS, then an IGP route should be used but...it wouldn't be in the same AS if it was learned via eBGP. Am I making sense? Someone please jump in or correct me if I am wrong. Thanks...Dain. ""bergenpeak"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > Looking at the administrative distance values for the different > routing mechanisms. > > Why would eBGP have a lower admin distance for a route than > if learned via an IGP (like OSPF or ISIS)? Why wouldn't > the default behavior be to prefer routes learned from the local > IGP rather than via eBGP? > > THanks Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=47269&t=47147 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
admin distance question [7:47147]
Looking at the administrative distance values for the different routing mechanisms. Why would eBGP have a lower admin distance for a route than if learned via an IGP (like OSPF or ISIS)? Why wouldn't the default behavior be to prefer routes learned from the local IGP rather than via eBGP? THanks Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=47147&t=47147 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
