From: Carlos Patriawan (carlos@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Aug 17 2000 - 07:11:54 GMT-3
Before make an "established" EBGP session, you must have a TCP connection
which is established over any IGP route or static route , if you go with
static and then
let the upstream router find the routes for you. Dont forget the
ebgp-multihop command as well.
Btw, i just build an MPLS VPN lab between some AS5300, GSR 12000 and
BPX here , i created small notes which probably help if there're any of you
would like
to create one since some problems i encountered with loopback interface on
BGP session.
1. Dont use "update-source loopback" in CE for EBGP session with PE.
2. Always Always use Loopback Interface for a PE to PE connection
3. Add "tag-switching vpi" command in tag-switch controller to define which
VPI that
you use for a local connection with BPX switches. This command is uncovered
in BPX doc.
Cheers,
Carlos
-----Original Message-----
From: Frye, Gary <Gary.Frye@getronics.com>
To: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com' <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 5:58 PM
Subject: RE: EBGP peering question
>According to Halabi (page 300):
>
>"It is important to remember that the BGP peers will never become
>established unless there is an IGP connectivity between the two peers or
the
>two peers are on the same segment."
>
>Even though he doesn't mention static routes, I'd assume that is the third
>(and final) way. So the syntax:
>-----------------------------------
>int s1
> ip add 209.149.135.1 255.255.255.0
>
>router bgp 3
> neighbor 192.68.12.1 remote-as 2
> neighbor 192.68.12.1 ebgp-multihop 2
>------------------------------------
>Won't do much good if this router doesn't have a route to 192.68.12.0
>I suppose you could get by with "ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 s1" and leave it
>up to the intermediate router to complete the route. But you wanted a way
>to avoid that.
>
>
>Gary Frye, Team34 - Network Services
>> Phone: (704) 427-0564
>> Pager: (800) 504-8567
>> Fax: (704) 590-7477
>> gary.frye@getronics.com
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gary Frye [mailto:gfrye@carolina.rr.com]
>Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 4:56 PM
>To: gary.frye@getronics.com
>Subject: RE: EBGP peering question
>
>
>I understand that part...I was trying to see if there are other ways to do
>this ..without static or igp... A policy route on both routers with ip next
>hop pointing to each other work too..
>
>Are there other ways ?
>
>Cheers,Padhu
>2 more days to go....
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Robert LaGrasse [mailto:rlagras1@tampabay.rr.com]
>Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 12:20 PM
>To: Padhu@steinroe.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: Re: EBGP peering question
>
>
>BGP peers establish a TCP connection between the routers. If there are no
>static or IGP routes to the router you're trying to peer with, it isn't
>going to happen.
>
>-B
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Padhu@steinroe.com <Padhu@steinroe.com>
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Date: Monday, August 14, 2000 10:17 AM
>Subject: EBGP peering question
>
>
>>If the EBGP peers are NOT directly connected and if ur sourcing from
>>loopbacks on both ends,is there a way to establish ebgp peering without
>>static routes ? No routing protocols in between the ebgp peers.
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>Cheers,Padhu
>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:24:26 GMT-3