From: Becky Qiang (becky.qiang@wincomsystems.com)
Date: Fri Sep 13 2002 - 14:50:04 GMT-3
Talking about RR and Confeds, I wonder when shall we use which. They seem
quite similiar...Becky
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nick Shah" <nshah@connect.com.au>
To: "Khalid Siddiq" <khalid@sys.net.pk>; "Omer Ansari" <omer@ansari.com>
Cc: "Lim Meng Toon" <limmti@yahoo.com.sg>; "Peng Zheng" <zpnist@yahoo.com>;
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 12:51 AM
Subject: Re: bgp confederation peer
> Khalid
>
> Q. is confederation external Sub-ASs should by fully mesh ?
>
> Ans : the whoole idea of Confeds and RR's are to get rid of Full mesh
> nature. So 'full mesh' is not required 'between' confeds.
> However 'within' a confed, the behaviour is like iBGP, so once again full
> mesh (or RR's) are desired.
>
> Nick
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick Shah [mailto:nshah@connect.com.au]
> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 9:28 AM
> To: Omer Ansari
> Cc: Lim Meng Toon; Peng Zheng; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: bgp confederation peer
>
>
> I have thoroughly tested this feature.
>
> You DONT need to explicitly specify 'non-connected' confederations, in bgp
> confederation peers
>
> Check my earlier thread on this.
>
> Nick
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Omer Ansari" <omer@ansari.com>
> To: "Omer Ansari" <omer@ansari.com>
> Cc: "Lim Meng Toon" <limmti@yahoo.com.sg>; "Peng Zheng"
<zpnist@yahoo.com>;
> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 13, 2002 9:24 AM
> Subject: Re: bgp confederation peer
>
>
> > OK, so the example shows RTC has a neighbor command with a
> > router in AS70. [didnt notice in haste]
> >
> > however, i still stand by my hypothesis.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 13 Sep 2002, Omer Ansari wrote:
> >
> > > I beg to differ.
> > >
> > > if you dont have all the sub-ASes in the bgp confederation peers, how
> > > would you know if the routes coming via an AS are from outside or from
> > > within the confederation?
> > >
> > > i think you have to have all the sub-ASes listed in the bgp confed
peers
> > > (even if they are not adjoint)
> > >
> > > see bgp case study:
> > > http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/16.html#A23.0
> > >
> > > RtC is not directly connected to AS70 but still has as70 in the bgp
> confed
> > > peers statement, for routes coming from/via as70, how would rtc know
if
> > > its from within the confederation or outside, if it doesnt know who
all
> is
> > > in in the confederation?
> > >
> > > regards,
> > > Omer
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, 13 Sep 2002, [iso-8859-1] Lim Meng Toon wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Usually you only need to peer to those routers within
> > > > the confederation as required and not to every peers.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > --- Peng Zheng <zpnist@yahoo.com> wrote: > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Should I only specify AS peers which are directly
> > > > > connected with local router or Specify all ASs that
> > > > > belong to the confederation?
> > > > >
> > > > > IN CIM BGP, they specify all ASs. But I remember I
> > > > > saw some examples only specify ASs directly
> > > > > connected.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Which one should be used?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you for help.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best Wishes,
> > > > > Peng Zheng
> > > > >
> > > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > > > Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
> > > > > http://news.yahoo.com
> > > >
> > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > Get cool ringtones and name logos for your phone!
> > > > http://sg.mobile.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Oct 07 2002 - 07:43:51 GMT-3