From: Ronnie Royston (RonnieR@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Jan 15 2001 - 12:50:00 GMT-3
The peer group concept is aimed at relieving large networks from many
peering connections, (n-1)/2 for any to any communication. The peer group
architecture supports groups, where each group has a border peer that speaks
to every router in his group plus the border peer from the other group.
In your senario, R3 must be in it's own peer group and R1 + R2 must be in
their own peer group. With this setup, when R1 speaks to R3, the connection
is said to be a 'peer-on-demand' connection. Use 'dlsw
peer-on-demand-defaults tcp' command to customize these types of
connections.
This type of configuration can be contrasted with dynamic peers. With
dynamic peers, you must configure every peer connection on every router
using the 'dynamic' keyword. This type of configuration is best for
minimizing the number of central site routers and for dial-backup.
-----Original Message-----
From: Lykourgiotis Paraskevas [mailto:ParaskevasL@pcsystems.gr]
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2001 5:42 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: DLSW Question-Peer groups
Hi all.
One more DLSW question.
Suppose the following scenario :
r1---r2---r3
r1 and r2 are in a peer group where r2 is the border peer.
r2 has r1 and r3 as remote peers.
The question: Does r3 have to be in a peer group (by himself) to assure that
explorers from r1 are always sent to r3 also?
Me, I thought not until I found a Cisco presentation for DLSW saying that r3
has to be in a peer-group also (i.e. in a second peer-group having only r3
as a member). Why?
TIA
Paraskevas
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:30 GMT-3