Re: BGP

From: Ben Rife (brife@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Jul 12 1999 - 22:02:58 GMT-3


   
   Got it Ed, I think I can understand now. It's more or less a
   precaution.
   
   Thanks,
   
   1 days...
   Ben
   
   From: Edward Taggart
   
   To: Ben Rife ; ccielab@groupstudy.com
   
   Sent: Monday, July 12, 1999 8:44 PM
   
   Subject: Re: BGP
   
   Ben, If you have a copy of Bruce Caslow's book check out Page 462 on
   the bottom. He has a nice explanation of the rule of
   synchronization.
   
   
   
   The way I understand it, synchronization is used when you have BGP
   redistributing to the IGP. With Synchronization (on by default) a
   router will not announce BGP routes to other EBGP neighbors until the
   routes appear in the IGP through the redistribution.
   
   
   
   Turning off synchronization will allow the BGP router to advertise
   routes to another EBGP neighbor without knowledge of the route in it's
   IGP...
   
   
   
   - Ed (14 Days....)
   
   ----- Original Message -----
   
   From: Ben Rife
   
   To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
   
   Sent: Monday, July 12, 1999 7:40 PM
   
   Subject: BGP
   
   My favorite topic...NOT.
   
   
   
   I just realized that I don't really know when to use the "no sync"
   command in BGP. I mean, why would you want to advertise routes that
   you don't have in your route table?
   
   
   
   When those routes do get propagated to your route table, won't they
   instantly be injected into your BGP because you have advertised them
   with the "network XXXX" cmd, eventhough you don't have the "no sync"
   cmd?
   
   
   
   Please explain...
   
   
   
   1 days.....
   
   
   
   Benjy Rife
   MCSE, CNE, CCIE Candidate
   brife@bignet.net
   www.bignet.net/~brife



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:21:42 GMT-3