Thx to all who replied.
Make sense now :))
Beers to all!
-Original Message-
From: The Long and Winding Road [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 31 March 2003 05:33
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: BGP Route Reflectors [7:66488]
Mike Martins wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED
All,
Please can someone clear this up for me, if you have the time.
IBGP peers do not have to be physically connected to one another, as long as
an IGP (most preferably) is running between them.
On page 128 (paragraph 1) of the Routing TCP/IP Volume 2 book, it says the
following about route
Wellthat is what the book says. Try it out on your own lab and you will
see that a Route-reflector client does not have to be directly connected to
the Route-reflector for it to work. Just tried it in my home lab and it
works, the client is 3 routers away.
Message Posted at:
At 04:52 PM 3/31/2003 +, \\[EMAIL PROTECTED]\
wrote:
All,
Please can someone clear this up for me, if you have the time.
IBGP peers do not have to be physically connected to one another, as long as
an IGP (most preferably) is running between them.
In most cases the routers are not adjacent
All,
Please can someone clear this up for me, if you have the time.
IBGP peers do not have to be physically connected to one another, as long as
an IGP (most preferably) is running between them.
On page 128 (paragraph 1) of the Routing TCP/IP Volume 2 book, it says the
following about route
wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
All,
Please can someone clear this up for me, if you have the time.
IBGP peers do not have to be physically connected to one another, as long
as
an IGP (most preferably) is running between them.
nope. direct connect is preferred, but nope - don't
-
From:
To:
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 9:10 AM
Subject: BGP Route Reflectors [7:66488]
All,
Please can someone clear this up for me, if you have the time.
IBGP peers do not have to be physically connected to one another, as long
as
an IGP (most preferably) is running between them.
On page
A practise that is becoming quite common is running BGP on the edges of an
AS only. It is a waste for a router in the core to have a full internet
table. The Core could then comprise of ie MPLS which would optimize the
traffic flows.
I cannot remember which book I used but when I was studying for
The Long and Winding Road wrote:
wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
All,
Please can someone clear this up for me, if you have the time.
IBGP peers do not have to be physically connected to one
another, as long
as
an IGP (most preferably) is running between them.
nope.
Yes, EBGP multihop is between different AS's, that is a different setup, it
must also have a way of reaching across the hops, an IGP.
On a IBGP you can have a hop across ie 5 routers in a IBGP peering session.
As long as the IGP can reach the other peer it will work. Also, the full
mesh
Mike Martins wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes, EBGP multihop is between different AS's, that is a different setup,
it
must also have a way of reaching across the hops, an IGP.
nope - works just fine for iBGP as well.
On a IBGP you can have a hop across ie 5 routers in a IBGP
11 matches
Mail list logo
