From: Greg Schmitt (GSchmitt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Jun 14 2000 - 17:01:48 GMT-3
Michael,
Answers (hopefully correct) in line.
Cheers,
Greg Schmitt
Internetwork Solutions Engineer
ThruPoint, Inc. (formerly Total Network Solutions)
Current: 703-394-4577 (Client Location)
Voice: 410-349-9772
Cell: 443-822-5183
Pager: 888-773-0423 or pager.gschmitt@thrupoint.net
e-mail: GSchmitt@thrupoint.net
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Needham [mailto:mineedha@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2000 4:48 PM
To: CCIELAB@groupstudy.com
Subject: BGP CONFEDERATIONS Question
In a confederation can I still use update-source between two different
portions of the confederated network. Ie between 5555 to 4444 neigbors
with a confed of 6?
===>Yes, they are separate autonomous systems (EBGP).
If I continue to use a loopback as a neighbor address do I need EBGP
multihop between to two AS's within the confed. to permit connectivity?
===>Yes, they are separate autonomous systems (EBGP).
Does the next-hop commands still relative within the confed?
===>If you are talking about between 5555 and 4444, then probably not.
Usually the different ASs are directly connected, and you have a default
route pointing to the loopback address.
Finally, if a router is part of a confederation and has no other
connections other to a member of it's "native" conferedation, do you
still need the confederation peer ID command???
===>Yes. All routers involved in a confederation must have the peer
statement.
I'm doing a rather complex LAb (self invented) and having issues with
such... Thanks
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:23:42 GMT-3