Re[2]: BGP Route Reflectors and Next-hop-self

From: Stanislav Sinyagin (SSinyagin@xxxxxx)
Date: Wed Jan 05 2000 - 06:15:09 GMT-3

• Next message: Faz.Memon@xxxxxxxx: "What is the VPN definition in relation to the LAB and other questions"
• Previous message: Stanislav Sinyagin: "Re[2]: IP Policy routing question"
• Maybe in reply to: Naushad Prasla: "BGP Route Reflectors and Next-hop-self"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

   
Naushad Prasla <naushad.prasla@sabre.com> wrote:
NP> Brad,

NP> Please correct me if I am wrong. Would'nt both R3 and R4 need to be clients
NP> in order for these two Routers to exchange routes among them selves? Both R
3
NP> and R4 are originating certain routes.

then, both R2 and R4 need to be the roure reflector clients of R3.

NP> Dennis,

NP> here is pertinent configs from all Routers.

NP> Notice how R4 is showing next hop address for network 40.0.0.0 (orginated o
n
NP> R1) as 192.168.23.2. Also, notice how R2 is showing next hop address for
NP> network 30.0.0.0 (originated on R4) as 192.168.13.2. Neither of these next
NP> hops addresses shows to directly connected despite of the Next-hop-self
NP> command.

route-reflector duplicates the route updates without changing them.
So, neither nex-hop-self nor route-maps would change them.

• Next message: Faz.Memon@xxxxxxxx: "What is the VPN definition in relation to the LAB and other questions"
• Previous message: Stanislav Sinyagin: "Re[2]: IP Policy routing question"
• Maybe in reply to: Naushad Prasla: "BGP Route Reflectors and Next-hop-self"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:22:43 GMT-3