From: Jason1 (jason1@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun May 06 2001 - 02:05:14 GMT-3
I do not see a problem here.
1. A route reflector client cannot peer with any other iBGP router outside
of it's cluster , it can however peer with any route-reflector or eBGP
router.
2. A route-reflector client can peer with a route-reflector in different
cluster because it doesn't have to have any knowledge of the cluster it
belongs to. Part of route-reflector configuration is that the client is
config as per normal. Since there exists a cluster-ID for each of the
cluster, there shouldn't be any issue with "belonging" to multiple cluster.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Ccieyet2b@aol.com>
To: <myccie@hotmail.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2001 8:45 AM
Subject: Re: Routing TCP/IP Volume II, Jeff Doyle -- Possible mistake?
> Hi all,
>
> Like yourselves, I was waiting with great anticipation for this book to
> become available and finally last week I picked it up. And, so far, I'm
very
> pleased.
>
> However, I think I may have come across a significant error (or, at least,
an
> inconsistency). I don't have a practice lab yet so I can't test this, but
> here's the possible error.
>
> In chapter 3, in the discussion of Router Reflectors, Jeff says, (I'm
> paraphrasing), "A route reflector client can't peer with any internal BGP
> router outside of it's cluster" which makes alot of sense. But, then, a
> little later, he goes on to say that a route reflector client can peer
with
> multiple route reflectors and the route reflectors do not have to be part
of
> the same cluster.
>
> This implies that a route reflector client can belong to two different
> clusters simultaneously. Is this possible? If so, is this useful?
Sounds
> to me that even if this is possible, it something that should be avoided.
> What do you think?
>
> Jim
> **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:30:34 GMT-3