From: Logan, Harold (loganh@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon May 06 2002 - 17:33:13 GMT-3
I agree; in most cases an IGP will provide that connectivity. But disabling syn
chronization should provide for connectivity in a full IBGP environment. Additi
onally, if Jason adds networks to R1 that he wants to be propagated to R3 and v
ice versa with networks from R3 being advertised to R1, he'll need to add the n
eighbor next-hop-self command. I've done scenarios similar to this one, but in
those cases I've had the IBGP peers directly connected to each other, rather th
an having one router go through another in order to peer. If disabling synchron
ization doesn't work, then the only other all BGP solution I can think of would
be to make R2 a route reflector.
I don't think his scenario will qualify as a race state, because BGP was never
depending on an IGP in the first place. Unless I misunderstand Halabi, a race s
tate occurs when BGP has its IGP pulled out from under it. Jason, will you plea
se let us know if putting a no sync on all 3 routers fixes things?
Hal
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter van Oene [mailto:pvo@usermail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 06, 2002 3:52 PM
To: Jason Wydra; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: IBGP HELP??
This is what IGP's are for. Turn up your favorite, advertise link/loopback
addressing and make sure to set update-source loopback0 (assuming you are
peering via loopbacks)
At 11:26 AM 5/6/2002 -0700, Jason Wydra wrote:
>I have AS 3127 with 3 routers. R1 is connected to R2 via Token ring. R2 is
>connected to R3 via Ethernet. R1 and R3 do not have a direct connection.
>They are attempting to peer through R2. R1 and R2 neighbor states are
>active. R2 and R3 neighbor state is active. R1 and R3 neighbor state will
>NOT come up. The network on link between R1 and R2 is 204.156.20.0/30 and
>network between R2 and R3 is 165.40.22.0/23. From R1 I CANNOT ping R3. R1
>has learned a route from BGP to R3. Looking on R3 it has not learned a
>route to R1 (From R2). This is obviously why I cannot ping from R1 to R3
>and this is also why the BGP peer won't come up. Simply adding a static
>route on R3 pointing to R1 solves the problem and my BGP peers comes up.
>My question is why does R2 tell R1 about the 165 network but R2 does not
>tell R3 about the 204 network? Why do I have to add a static to R3? Please
>help!!
>
>Jason Wydra
>
>CCNP,CCDP
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:58:51 GMT-3