Re: BGP Confederation Problem?

From: Joe Soricelli (jsoricelli@xxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Oct 17 1999 - 12:37:11 GMT-3


   
Scott-

Do the 2 confederation peers also have similar configs to what you sent,
i.e. confederation indification number and confederation peers?

-joe
------------------------------------------------------------------
  Joseph M. Soricelli, CCIE #4803, CCNP, CCSI #20666
  EMAIL: jsoricelli@ccci.com

  Chesapeake Network Solutions
  8110 Gatehouse Road, Suite 101E Phone: (703) 207-0757
  Falls Church, VA 22042 Fax: (703) 207-0441

  FYI - About Chesapeake: We are a Cisco Certified Training and
  professional services partner. We offer most of the Cisco
  training courses as well as training for Fore, NetScout, and
  CheckPoint-1 Firewalls. We provide network consulting services,
  including design, network health, management, firewall,
  and problem solving. We now have 23 CCIEs on our staff
  of instructor/consultants.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott O'Donnell <scotto@iworksys.com>
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Date: Sunday, October 17, 1999 11:17 AM
Subject: BGP Confederation Problem?

>I've configured a BGP confederation but ran into a problem.
>
>I have R2 with the following BGP config.
>router bgp 6502
> bgp confederation identifier 275
> bgp confederation peers 6505 6507
> network 150.5.2.0 mask 255.255.255.0
> neighbor 150.5.25.5 remote-as 6505
> neighbor 150.5.25.5 next-hop-self
> neighbor 150.5.27.7 remote-as 6507
> neighbor 150.5.27.7 next-hop-self
> neighbor 150.5.32.3 remote 341
>
>When I look at the BGP table on neigh 150.5.32.3, it shows
>the routes for the confederation with the AS_PATH containing
>the internal (65xx) AS numbers.
>
> Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
>*> 150.5.2.0/24 150.5.32.2 0 0 275 i
>*> 150.5.3.0/24 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
>*> 150.5.5.0/24 150.5.32.2 0 275 6505 i
>*> 150.5.7.0/24 150.5.32.2 0 275 6507 i
>
>My impression was that the internal AS (65xx) would be dropped as
>it was advertised to a EBGP peer.
>
>Yes?



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:21:53 GMT-3