I would clarify that the rule here is that you each BGP speaking router needs to have
a route to the Next Hop routers advertised into the AS.
*** REPLY SEPARATOR ***
On 12/21/2000 at 9:43 PM Katson PN Yeung wrote:
>In case you have 2 routers connect back-to-back with iBGP, y
In case you have 2 routers connect back-to-back with iBGP, you don't need
IGP.
""Shaw, Winston Mr 5 SIG CMD"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I saw this original question yesterday but got sidetracked before I could
> send a response.
> I think
l with the hellos, updates,etc.
Thoughts anyone ?
Winston.
-Original Message-
From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 3:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: BGP newbie question, interesting
Dan West -- CCNA, CCNP (in progress) aske
Hi Dan,
I thought I would throw my two cents in.
There are a few key reasons why one requires an interior routing protocol (or at worst
case a routing strategy should one use statics) within an AS. First and foremost, you
must consider what iBGP does within the AS. Essentially, it allows i
Dan West -- CCNA, CCNP (in progress) asked,
>Is it possible to run IBGP as the ONLY IGP for a
>particular network (AS)??
Possible, but not a good idea in almost any situation.
iBGP really is an unfortunate term. It is a protocol for
coordinating the "outside" activities of eBGP, and is not i
But remember, you have to do full iBGP peering inside your AS. When you have
two routers, it wouldn't be a problem for no IGP.
When you have more than two, unless they are connected by a share medium
(such as Ethernet) and peer using the connected interface, otherwise, you
have to make some intra
6 matches
Mail list logo
