From: Carlos G Mendioroz (tron@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Jul 30 2002 - 16:36:14 GMT-3
Chang,
go to the list of BGP route selection process and start thinking
"can I modify this ?"
I would go with the longest match: depending on your current setup,
this could be just advertising R3-R5 at R2 (if you are summarising,
that would work) or as a last resort, you could advertise all the
corresponding /32's. Not nice at all, but it plays along the rules...
ying c wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Here's one of the question that I wonder one of you
> smart guys may have an answer:
>
> R1------R2-------R3
> \ | |
> \-----R4-------R5
>
> R1 is in AS100, R2 and R4 are in AS200, R1, R2, R4 are
> running BGP. R2, R4, R3 and R4 are running OSPF. R2
> and R4 both peer with R1 and send full ospf specific
> routes to R1.
>
> The requirement is to have R1 always use R1-R2 link as
> the primary route to reach the network between R3 and
> R5. Normally, we would use MED, AS-PATH or aggregate
> routes to achieve this. However, here's the tricky
> part: you are not allowed to use MEDs and not to
> change the configuration on R1 or R4 to accomplish
> this.
>
> I did it by using a lower metric number when I
> redistribute ospf into bgp in R3, but I think this
> pretty much violated "not to use MEDs" rule. Is there
> any other way to solve it?
>
> Thanks,
> Chang
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:36:49 GMT-3