From: John Neiberger (neiby@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Mar 15 2002 - 17:52:18 GMT-3
Actually, it was Avici.
---- On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Robert L. DuBell (bobdu11@cox.net)
wrote:
> Sounds like a "foundrey" device....
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 15, 2002 7:08 PM
> Subject: Re: Never mind ... Re: BGP and OSPF Router-ID
>
>
> > At 11:42 AM -0500 3/15/02, John Neiberger wrote:
> > >I didn't realize that the site I was looking at wasn't
talking
> > >about Cisco router configuration. It's a Cisco
*competitor*
> > >who has designed their CLI to be just about identical to
> > >Cisco's. It's almost indistinguishable from the Cisco CLI.
> > >
> > >Sneaky, sneaky....
> > >
> > >John
> >
> > The whole CLI situation is ironic. Now, I'm not faulting
Cisco here
> > for developing a language that was appropriate for the time
it was
> > developed. But as there began to be an installed base,
customers
> > would demand "CLI" on any router. I remember, at Nortel,
having
> > customers demand to have show commands for Cisco-specific
hardware.
> >
> > Juniper and GateD control languages have a distinct
resemblance; both
> > show their ancestry in UNIX. I happen to think their nested
> > structures are better for describing complex constructs.
Bay BCC
> > (NOT site mangler) also is similar. All these languages
are more and
> > more compatible with object-oriented specification, as in
Routing
> > Policy Specification Language.
> >
> > Where GateD is Juniper-like (or it can be argued the
reverse is more
> > true), Zebra is very much Cisco-like.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >---- On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, John Neiberger (neiby@ureach.com)
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >> I was just reading some material from a website (not
CCO)
> > >that
> > >> has an explicit warning that states if we change the BGP
> > >router
> > >> ID using the 'bgp router-id' command, this changes the
router
> > >> ID for both BGP _and_ OSPF and causes both processes to
> > >restart.
> > >>
> > >> I don't have a way to test this at work or I'd do it
right
> > >now
> > >> just to verify it. Is this really the case?
> > >>
> > >> I don't recall this happening before, but I don't
usually
> > >hard-
> > >> set the BGP router ID. However, I usually hard-set the
OSPF
> > >> router ID. Does changing it manually have an effect on
the
> > >BGP
> > >> router ID as well?
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > > > John
> >
> > --
> > "What Problem are you trying to solve?"
> > ***send Cisco questions to the list, so all can benefit --
not
> > directly to me***
> >
>
****************************************************************
************
> ****
> > Howard C. Berkowitz hcb@gettcomm.com
> > Chief Technology Officer, GettLab/Gett Communications
> http://www.gettlabs.com
> > Technical Director, CertificationZone.com
> http://www.certificationzone.com
> > "retired" Certified Cisco Systems Instructor (CID) #93005
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:10 GMT-3