From: John Neiberger (neiby@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Jan 02 2002 - 14:44:38 GMT-3
This was covered in great detail on the other list just last
week. I'll summarize the issue, though.
The BGP synchronization rule states that if a route has been
learned via iBGP, the route *and* its next-hop must be in the
routing table already. If those IGP routes were learned via
OSPF there is an additional requirement. The OSPF router ID
that advertised those prefixes must match the BGP router ID of
the iBGP peer advertising the prefixes.
Apparently, this was a requirement in an older RFC--which Cisco
implemented--but was obsoleted by a newer RFC.
The thread from the other list should be in the archives now.
It goes into greater detail.
HTH,
John
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:56:14 GMT-3