From: Gev, Chaim (Chaim.Gev@xxxxxx)
Date: Mon Jul 08 2002 - 04:19:02 GMT-3
Hi,
It is important to know if you have other egp connections.
For the scenario you plotted you don't need any route reflectors because everyt
hing that r6 knows, r5 knows too an vise versa.
If on the other hand, r6 would be the only one peering to r7, r4 wouldn't pass
the learnt networks to r5 without being a route reflector.
r5 was the one that advertised 192.xxx to r4, so r4 didn't reflect it back. r6
knows 2 paths to 192.xxx and it is right.
>From: Giveortake@aol.com
>Reply-To: Giveortake@aol.com
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: BGP Route REFLECTOR ?
>Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 01:41:43 EDT
>
>Here goes..
>
>R4 is hub router and it has a PVC to R5 and R6. There is no PVC between R5 &
> R6. It is a point-to-multipoint. R5 & R6 also have Ethernets and are
>connected to R7 who also has an eth on the same subnet.
>
>R4 is peered to R5 and R6. R5 and R6 area peered to R7. R5&R6 are NOT
>peered.
>
>So the question is, do I need to use the route-reflector-client on R4? I do
>not believe so.
>
>When I do use the route-reflector client I get strange results on R5 and R6
>when I do a show ip bgp. R7 is advertising a 192.x.x.x network. When I
>use the Route-reflector client under the above scenerio, R6 shows TWO paths
>to the 192.x.x.x network. One directly to R7 and the other through
>R5......... When I do the same show ip bgp on R5, it shows only ONE
>path to the 192 network via R7. If nothing else, I figured they ought to
>both have two ways but they dont.
>
>If anyone followed the above mess and wants to help let me know. I can send
>configs........
>
>The above scenerio is from IPEXPERT lab 20-3.........
>
>Thanks,
>
>David
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:36:21 GMT-3