From: David Ankers (d.ankers@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Feb 10 2001 - 17:24:15 GMT-3
The only issue with this is that the route to the next hop in not learnt
via the bgp session it's self or else you'll have a race condition..
On Saturday 10 February 2001 18:32, Peter Van Oene wrote:
> I've seen this done on production networks :) (IBGP connections over the
> internet) Its odd, but works :)
>
> Pete
>
>
> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
>
> On 2/9/2001 at 5:11 PM Chuck Larrieu wrote:
> >I'm spending the weekend with BGP - want to know enough to be able to fake
> >it in the ASET lab next week.
> >
> >Just pondering something. If iBGP routers do not need to be directly
> >connected, then is it reasonable to try to join up two labs across the
> >internet and see what we can see?
> >
> >Me---------the internet-----------you
> > <-----------ibgp--------------->
> >
> >my router
> >router bgp 65000
> >neighbor your_outside_ip_address
> >
> >your router
> >router bgp 65000
> >neighbor my_outside_ ip_address
> >
> >I don't think there would be any implications to the global internet
> > routing table. But if that is a concern, a simple GRE tunnel could
> > alleviate that issue.
> >
> >Worth a shot? Any problems to the internet itself, if we use a private AS
> >number and the appropriate neighbor statements?
> >
> >anyone interested in trying this tomorrow sometime after 5:00 p.m.
> > pacific ( 8:00 p.m. eastern ) ?
> >If this is feasible, several of use could link up. Hell of a lot simpler
> >than trying IPSec / VPN tunnels
> >
> >Chuck
> >
> >A long shot at passing is better than no shot.
> >Right now that's all I got to get me through,
> >So I gotta believe!
> >
> >( paraphrased from Kathy Baille / Baille and the Boys
> >a song from several years ago )
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:28:44 GMT-3