inline
At 10:43 PM 10/13/2002 +, Nigel Taylor wrote:
See Inline..
- Original Message -
From: Howard C. Berkowitz
To:
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: Nanog Post: redistribute bgp considered harmful [7:54961]
At 4:13 PM + 10/13/02, Peter van Oene wrote
At 11:30 PM 10/12/2002 +, Zim wrote:
I like this question. It seems to ponder the worth of a command based on the
assumption that the command only exist to serve a purpose other than a real
world application. Will an ISP ever need to redistribute bgp routes into the
routing table of any IGP?
At 4:13 PM + 10/13/02, Peter van Oene wrote:
At 11:30 PM 10/12/2002 +, Zim wrote:
I like this question. It seems to ponder the worth of a command based on
the
assumption that the command only exist to serve a purpose other than a real
world application. Will an ISP ever need to
See Inline..
- Original Message -
From: Howard C. Berkowitz
To:
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 4:31 PM
Subject: Re: Nanog Post: redistribute bgp considered harmful [7:54961]
At 4:13 PM + 10/13/02, Peter van Oene wrote:
At 11:30 PM 10/12/2002 +, Zim wrote:
I like
I like this question. It seems to ponder the worth of a command based on the
assumption that the command only exist to serve a purpose other than a real
world application. Will an ISP ever need to redistribute bgp routes into the
routing table of any IGP? Well like so much in Internetworking, it
All,
This was a recent post on the Nanog list which I thought could get
some interest on the list. Basically, the poster is questioning the
relevance or real world requirements/need for certain commands, in this case
it's the redistribute bgp command.
Here's the original post...
Sean
my first thought is how you gonna convince Cisco that it's worth their time
and effort to do the work necessary to remove the command? Don't they have
better things to do, like bug fixing? ;-
Chuck
Nigel Taylor wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
All,
This
7 matches
Mail list logo
