From: Naushad Prasla (naushad.prasla@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Jan 04 2000 - 19:30:14 GMT-3
Brad,
You are absolutely correct. I removed R2 and R3 from Client Reflector
relationship and my results were the same as before. So, I did not need
Route-Reflector command pointing to R2. However, my original problem with
next hop not being correct still remains.
Any ideas...
Naushad Prasla
-----Original Message-----
From: Brad Hedlund [mailto:BHedlund@LifeTimeFitness.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2000 3:15 PM
To: 'Naushad Prasla'; Brad Hedlund; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: BGP Route Reflectors and Next-hop-self
R1---E---R2---I--R3---I--R4
R3 will reflect R2's routes to R4
By virtue of that configuration, R3 will reflect R4's routes to R2
There is no need to mesh route-reflections.
Think of it as a mirror. If I hold up a mirror, you will be able to see
what is relflected in that mirror ... AND ... those reflections would be
able to see you too!
Have you tried the configuration with R4 as a route-reflector-client from R3
only?
-Brad
>
> Brad,
>
> Please correct me if I am wrong. Would'nt both R3 and R4 need
> to be clients
> in order for these two Routers to exchange routes among them
> selves? Both R3
> and R4 are originating certain routes.
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:22:43 GMT-3