From: Chris Hugo (chrishugo@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Jul 29 2002 - 17:25:05 GMT-3
Hi Ted,
Before you make that assumption fix the sync issue :). Also take a look at Hala
bi's BGP (pg.152-159) bible which states their are three RIBs (RIB-IN, LOC-RIB,
and RIB-OUT). BGP's input policy engine runs thru the Decision Process before
the routes even touch the Loc-RIB (IP Routing Table).
HTH and have fun with BGP,
chris hugo
Ted McDermott <tedmcdermott@yahoo.com> wrote: I'm listing a BGP and IP route
table below for network
128.213.0.0. It appears that before the BGP
decision-making process is entered, (i.e. next-hop
reachable, then weight, then local-preference, etc.)
the first criteria in the decision-making process is
whether the route is learned via EBGP or IBGP, because
of the administrative distance difference. Thus, if
you have one route learned via EBGP and the other via
IBGP, it will always take the EBGP, regardless of the
other BGP parameters. Is that correct?
Note the equal weight, local-preference, and the
longer as-path of the preferred route.
rtb#sho ip route 128.213.0.0
Routing entry for 128.213.0.0/16
Known via "bgp 100", distance 20, metric 0
Tag 300, type external
Last update from 192.208.10.5 13:55:00 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 192.208.10.5, from 192.208.10.5, 13:55:00 ago
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
AS Hops 4
rtb>sho ip bgp 128.213.0.0
BGP routing table entry for 128.213.0.0/16, version 8
Paths: (2 available, best #1)
Advertised to non peer-group peers:
203.250.13.41
300 500 400 200
192.208.10.5 from 192.208.10.5 (192.208.10.174)
Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external,
best, ref 2
200
128.213.63.2 from 203.250.13.41 (203.250.13.41)
Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid,
internal, not synchronized, ref 2
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:36:48 GMT-3