From: Edmund Roche-Kelly (edr9007@xxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Mar 12 2002 - 12:20:35 GMT-3
Setting a neighbor as a route reflector client allows you to advertise
routes learned over other IBGP connections to that IBGP neighbor. I
don't see how setting next-hop-self would achieve this.
Ed
Michael Snyder wrote:
>
> I've been reading up on BGP lately, and have come up with a question.
>
> Is there a functional difference between setting a neighbor as a route
> reflector client, or setting a neighbor as next hop self? Assuming 'no
> sync', to my mind these commands seem to do the same thing. The same
> network topology and limits seem to apply to each command.
>
> Michael Snyder
> Lead Engineer
> Revolution Computer Systems
> CCNP/DP MCSE NT/2000
> (270) 443-7400
> (Fax) 443-7070
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Peter van Oene
> Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 9:12 PM
> To: Stephen Oliver; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: BGP and OSPF synchronization
>
> BGP synch is long dead and gone. Further, it may have been dead before
> route reflection became commonplace. Given 1403 (bgp to OSPF
> interaction)
> predates 1863 (first hint of RR technology) by two years, it occurs to
> me
> that possibly interaction with BGP synch wasn't a tested feature of RR
> code, particularly wrt to 1403 operation. This would make sense since
> one
> wouldn't run into IBGP scaling issues if one were running a non full
> IBGP
> mesh transit AS. The two features indirectly solve the same problem.
>
> It's a sad state of affairs when intelligent folks have to waste quality
>
> time learning useless features.
>
> At 07:13 PM 3/11/2002 +0000, Stephen Oliver wrote:
> >I have 3 routers in a frame relay hub and spoke ospf configuration.
> >
> >The ospf is working fine and I have set the router IDs to the router
> >number. R1 is 1.1.1.1 etc.
> >
> > r1 ---------r5-----------r2
> >
> >I have configured BGP in AS 13 on all the routers with r5 as a
> >route-reflector to both r1 and r2. Next I add a loopback on r1 and r2
> and
> >include them in OSPF. They are reachable everywhere. I then add the
> >loops into BGP. When they get to R5 they are unsync because of the
> >OSPF/BGP router ID issue so I change the router IDs on R1 and R2 to
> match
> >OSPF and hey presto R5 syncs the loopbacks.
> >
> >Now when I look at the spoke routers even though they get each others
> >loopbacks into their BGP tables they have marked them as unsync because
>
> >they are sourced from R5 for BGP and from the other end router for
> >OSPF. Another RID mismatch.
> >
> >I can overcome this by simply adding a network statement for the
> unsynced
> >prefixes on each spoke router.
> >
> >Is this a valid solution to the problem ?
> >
> >The whole scenario is just a test to see OSPF/BGP interactions.
> >
> >Thanks, Stephen.
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:01 GMT-3