From: Steven Weber (itweber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Mar 04 2001 - 20:50:33 GMT-3
just thought I mention the point, sorry if I confused anybody
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: Bowen,
Shawn
To: Groupstudy
Sent: 3/4/01 6:09:21 PM
Subject: RE: BGP no sync and Bootcamp
Labs
True, true. I didn't want to mention that cause I was worried
about the
implications of not understanding it:-) It's not usually what was meant
to
be done to inject a whole class A into BGP on accident:-) Aggregates
also
work nicely for this.
Shawn
-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Weber [mailto:itweber@earthlink.net ]
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2001 4:58 PM
To: Groupstudy; Bowen, Shawn
Subject: RE: BGP no sync and Bootcamp Labs
I just wanted to add to Shawn's statement, as this topic is worthy of
discussion because it is part of understanding the core of what bgp
is
about. I just wanted to add that you can also use the classful
network
address in your network statement without having to match on a BIT by
BIT
basis the only drawback is that everything in your routing table under
that
classful prefix ends up getting advertised.
----- Original Message -----
From: Bowen, mailto:sbowen@neteffectcorp.com Shawn
To: Groupstudy mailto:sbowen@neteffectcorp.com
Sent: 3/4/01 3:59:12 PM
Subject: RE: BGP no sync and Bootcamp Labs
No sync comes in handy when you do not want to have explicit BGP
network
statements. BGP will only use your network statement IF and ONLY
IF your
BGP network statement coincides with a BIT for BIT match in your
interior
routing protocol (forget about no-sync for a second). Now, this
is all cool
and dandy unless you are say using EIGRP and it summarizes the networks
for
you by default. Then when your BGP statement uses the actual
match it will
not match BIT for BIT and will not be included in BGP. No Sync
is one way
around this, another is a static route for your network to NULL on
the
router you want to inject into BGP. You will then go to the
longest match
rule and the NULL route will be ignored and BGP will get to inject it
without no-sync. As long as your interior routing protocol has
the route in
its tables, and your BGP network statement matches it BIT for BIT (IP
and
MASK) then it will fly.
Shawn
-----Original Message-----
From: crl [ mailto:cisco@crl.fdns.net mailto:mailto:cisco@crl.fdns.net
]
Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2001 3:15 PM
To: Groupstudy
Subject: BGP no sync and Bootcamp Labs
Just finished my first run through Bootcamp Lab #6. Not a very tough
one
anymore if you skip the protocols that are irrelevant to today's lab...
To
shake things up a bit, I decided to try to get the BGP configs all
working
without using the no sync command (I know that it wasn't outlawed in
the
lab.)
Well I had a terrible time of this. I admit, BGP is a weak area for me,
and
I likely won't be doing anymore Bootcamp labs until I polish my BGP
core
knowledge. Has anyone else done these labs leaving syncronization enabled?
I
could get about half my routes into the routing table, but the other half
I
just couldn't.
I know it's been brought up before, but if the odds are that the lab
is
going to outlaw the "no sync" command, why do so many people turn it on
when
doing scenarios?
That's my thought of the day...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:29:20 GMT-3