Re: ebgp vs ebgp multihop [7:66127]

2003-03-25 Thread Cisco Nuts
ieves this. >From: "The Long and Winding Road" >Reply-To: "The Long and Winding Road" >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: ebgp vs ebgp multihop [7:66127] >Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 14:48:53 GMT > >wrote in message >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hi all

Re: ebgp vs ebgp multihop [7:66127]

2003-03-25 Thread The Long and Winding Road
wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Hi all, > > i would like to know your opinion/experience about using ebgp multihop > comparing with ebgp. AFAIK, ebgp was designed for directly connected only > and using ebgp multhop is not recomended for ISP envy. would you please > tell me the caveat of

RE: ebgp vs ebgp multihop [7:66127]

2003-03-25 Thread Orlando Palomar Jr CCIE#11206
One reason I can think of is that ebgp-multihop (in the lab) allows me to peer to a remote router's loopback interface. This can somewhat overcome situations wherein the main link can be down, but there still exists another link in which I can keep the neighborship up for whatever reason. As BGP ru

ebgp vs ebgp multihop [7:66127]

2003-03-25 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi all, i would like to know your opinion/experience about using ebgp multihop comparing with ebgp. AFAIK, ebgp was designed for directly connected only and using ebgp multhop is not recomended for ISP envy. would you please tell me the caveat of using ebgp multihop for ISP envy. Any comments wou