From: Don Banyong (don_study@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Mar 11 2002 - 17:08:08 GMT-3
Sorry for this spam like email --ccie group!. I need your help!
Does any body have and is willing to sell a Cisco 4500M router with an ATM
DS3 Intf? Buyer will pay well. Buyer needs equipment ASAP.
Please email me or call Don at 301 216 9789. Or if you have a ATM DS-3 Intf
which you are currently not using for your LAB......please email or call me
ASAP.
Thanks,
Don
----- Original Message -----
From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: distribute-list
> At 1:54 PM -0500 3/11/02, Mannan Venkatesan wrote:
> >Ok, I have a question here. You said "redistribute bar information, with
> >filters y and foo metric x, into foo". 'Distribute-list y in' command
only
> >control what is going to go to your local router's routing table.
>
> Actually, it doesn't even do that. It filters what goes into the
> specific routing process' tables. The output of that routing table
> with other sources of routing information for installation in the
> main RIB.
>
> >It doesn't
> >filter what is going to go other routers.
> >
> >router eig 1
> >red osp 1 def x
> >distribute-list 1 in
> >
> >This will filter routes getting into local router's routing table based
on
> >acl 1. But it will not filter what is being sent to other eig neighbors
> >So, is "distribute-list in" import???
>
> Yes, with respect to the local router
>
> >
> >And again, distribute-list 1 out osp 1 will control the routes being
> >imported from ospf to eigrp. So, is distribute-list out "import" here?
> >Confused,enough???
>
> It's export with respect to ospf, but import with respect to eigrp.
> The redistribute command just doesn't have the fine granularity to
> make it unambiguous.
>
> Here's some material from the draft of my upcoming Wiley book,
> _Building Service Provider Networks_ (sorry, it's much more readable
> with formatting)
>
> Policy Notation with RPSL
> -------------------------
>
> RPSL is the only standards-based routing policy notation. Tools have
> been written to generate specific router configuration statements
> from it.
> This discussion of notation is not intended as a complete tutorial on
> the languages involved. Rather, it is intended to give a sense of
> their capabilities.
>
> Information flow in RPSL is defined with respect to peering
> specifications. Most often, peering specifications are of the
> granularity of AS to AS. They can, however, be refined to
> information flow at specific router interfaces, or broadened to
> define policy to multiple AS. The most general form of the peering
> specification allows the possibility of exchanging information
> between routing protocols, although BGP is the default.
>
> The full power of import and export expressions involves the
> capability of interacting among different routing protocols, not just
> BGP.
>
> Table 1: Import Peering Expression (from the RPSL specification)
>
> import: [protocol <protocol-1>] [into <protocol-2>]
> from <peering-1>
>
> AS-SETs are not the only kind of set you can define, and you can use
> recursion for each type.
>
> Route-sets include multiple prefixes:
>
> A fairly complex example is the peering-set:
> peering-set: prng-bar
> peering: AS1 at 9.9.9.1
> peering-set: prng-foo
> peering: prng-bar
> peering: AS2 at 9.9.9.1
> aut-num: AS1
> import: from prng-foo accept { 128.9.0.0/16 }
>
> --------
> Contrast Cisco, RPSL, and Juniper:
> --------
>
> JunOS has a specific policy construct that differs from RPSL, but has
> some of the same structured characteristics. Its syntax is
> consistent with the general JunOS style, which draws from FreeBSD
> UNIX configuration language.
> There are two primary ways to use policy with JunOS. Our principal
> focus here is on BGP acceptance and advertising policies. JunOS
> policy expressions, however, also can be used to control the
> exporting of routes out of the main RIB, into, for example, OSPF and
> ISIS.
> You write policies per routing protocol, using the policy-option
> construct. Most of the detailed policy matching and action
> conditions are in the policy-statement policy-name inside the
> policy-option structure, but are preceded by information about
> as-path, community, and damping.
> policy-options {
> as-path name regular-expression;
> community name members [community-ids];
> damping name {
> half-life minutes;
> max-suppress minutes;
> reuse number;
> suppress number;
> }
> policy-statement policy-name {
> term term-name {
> from {
> match-conditions;
> route-filter destination-prefix match-type <actions>;
> prefix-list name;
> }
> to {
> match-conditions;
> }
> then actions;
> }
> }
> prefix-list name {
> ip-addresses;
> }
>
>
> For individual policy expressions, you can combine unitary and set AS
> information with the Boolean operators AND, OR, and EXCEPT.
>
> The EXCEPT operator
>
> EXCEPT is the operator for set subtraction, and is equivalent to AND
> NOT. ((AS1 OR AS2) EXCEPT AS2), for example, equals AS1.
>
>
>
> >
> >Mannan
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com>
> >To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 11:27 AM
> >Subject: Re: distribute-list
> >
> >
> >> A general comment here that might help in understanding.
> >>
> >> "Redistribution" is a Cisco term that is rather awkward, but has been
> >> adopted by the industry. There are less ambiguous terms I'll mention
> >> in a minute.
> >>
> >> But I like to explain what "redistribute" means by expanding the
grammar:
> >>
> >> router foo
> >> redistribute bar default-metric x
> >> distribute-list y in
> >>
> >> means
> >>
> >> redistribute bar information, with filters y and foo metric x,
into
> >foo.
> >>
> >> The more general terms are import and export. Redistribution is
> >importing:
> >>
> >> import bar into foo [optional filters and actions]
> >>
> >> Export is like a distribute-list out.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> At 7:09 AM -0800 3/11/02, Bhisham Bajaj wrote:
> >> >mannan
> >> >
> >> >thank u
> >> >
> >> >i got the point and by now know how wrong i was in
> >> >understanding redistribution
> >> >
> >> >thank u
> >> >Reg
> >> >bajaj
> >> >
> >> >--- Mannan Venkatesan <mv70@lucent.com> wrote:
> >> >> Bajaj,
> >> >> Yigit is correct. "out" option works differently
> >> >> when you use it with a RP.
> >> >> If you use it with interface, it will filter the
> >> >> routes sending out of that
> >> >> interface.
> >> >>
> >> >> It you use it with RP, it will filter the routes
> >> >> from the RP being
> >> >> redistributed.
> >> >>
> >> >> HTHs,
> >> >> Mannan
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> >> From: "A Yigit Zorlu" <alec_cisco@yahoo.com>
> >> >> To: "'Bhisham Bajaj'" <bhishambajaj@yahoo.com>;
> >> >> "'Mannan Venkatesan'"
> >> >> <mv_lab@hotmail.com>; "'lab'"
> >> >> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >> >> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 1:48 AM
> >> >> Subject: RE: distribute-list
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > If you would using distribute-list 1 out serial 0
> >> >> you were correct. But in
> >> >> > this case it filters routes coming out of EIGRP
> >> >> into OSPF. Same for
> >> >> > connected. Same for IPX as well
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ipx nlsp
> >> >> > redistribute eigrp 1
> >> >> > distribute-list 7 out eigrp 1
> >> >> > from EIGRP into NLSP.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thanks,
> >> >> >
> > > >> > Yigit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:00 GMT-3