reflectors.
The requirement for the BGP/OSPF identifier is stated in RFC 1364:
Varadhan[Page
4]
RFC 1364 BGP OSPF InteractionSeptember 1992
3. BGP Identifier and OSPF router ID
The BGP identifier
Fred,
Thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for, although it appears that
the first part of your response was chopped off for some reason.
John
Fred Ingham 12/28/01 12:19:59 PM
reflectors.
The requirement for the BGP/OSPF identifier is stated in RFC 1364:
Varadhan
Fred, this is fascinating reading ( ok, so I need a life :- ) but I am
failing to understand the why behind the requirement.
Recognizing that there were real problems in real networks that those who
wrote the RFC were trying to solve, is there something I am missing in the
description?
In the
BGP-OSPF interaction has specifically been made Historic by the IETF
(i.e., obsolete). It's not in the current BGP documents, and there is
an administrative document that obsoletes 1364.
Sounds like Cisco meets the old RFC 1364, but new implementations
won't have the restriction.
Good find!
Some additional info. Per rfc 3166, RFC 1403, which obsoletes 1364, has
been moved to historic status since no one ever implemented it. This is
likely because redistributing BGP into your IGP really isn't a great idea
unless you'd like to see how fast you can dump your entire
Hmm.. Reading more, I think I made a mistake (there's a new one)
Anyway, Routers 1, 2, and 3 are BGP peers, however they connect via an IGP
domain that doesn't participate in BGP.
RT3 will learn of prefix X 4 times. Once from each ASBR via BGP with full
attributes intact. Once from each ASBR
John et al: The first part of my message said that this is a particular
problem with route reflectors. Don't know what I'm doing but the first
line of my messages gets chopped frequently.
Just didn't want people to think the BGP/OSPF requirement was arbitrary,
though it seems to be based on an
the first thing that comes to mind is that OSPF is the only other routing
protocol where RID is an inherant part of the structure and the process.
as to why this becomes an issue, since RIDs can change based upon
reconfigurations and reloads and process clearing, I can see the code
getting
- Original Message -
From: Peter van Oene
To:
Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 7:47 PM
Subject: Re: OSPF into iBGP with Sync [7:30126]
To my knowledge, this is purely a cisco implementation issue and you'd
need
to look at the code or ask the coders what their particular intention
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
the first thing that comes to mind is that OSPF is the only other routing
protocol where RID is an inherant part of the structure and the process.
as to why this becomes an issue, since RIDs can change based upon
reconfigurations and reloads and process clearing, I can see the code
getting
To my knowledge, this is purely a cisco implementation issue and you'd need
to look at the code or ask the coders what their particular intention
was. OSPF didn't play much of a role in transit networks during the time
when synchronization was a relevant option as far as I know so I doubt
12 matches
Mail list logo
