From: Paglia, John (USPC.PCT.Hopewell) (JPaglia@NA2.US.ML.com)
Date: Mon Oct 14 2002 - 21:51:09 GMT-3
From the point of view of the 'local' router, the remote statment wins the
cost wars.
Basically, if a remote router has it's local peer cost set to '2' and sends
it over in a capab. exchange, it's the equiv of your router being told what
to do. It can be influential, but if your local router has a remote
statement to that router with a cost of 4, your cost wins, even thought a
cost of 2 shows up in ths 'sh dlsw cap' output.
John
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jay [SMTP:ccienxtyear@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 8:27 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: dlsw cost question
>
> Hi,
>
> I have the following scenario; 3 routers in hub/spoke frame cloud. Hub is
> router A and spokes are B and C. Routers B and C are connected to a common
> ethernet segment that has a server. dlsw peer is established betweeb A--B
> and
> A---C. I am setting up the cost on the local peer statment of router B to
> be 2
> and router C to be 4.
> In this scenario, router A will chose router B to get to the server since
> lower cost is advertised.
>
> 1 - My question is, if I setup a cost on router A remote peer
> statements...what happends ? Does the local peer cost still rules or the
> remote peer cost overwrites ? Say I configure cost 4 on remote peer
> statement
> to router B and cost 2 to router C. Which router will router A chose to
> connect to the server ?
>
> I seem to have forgotten...but vaguely remember that if both are
> configured,
> one overwrites the other.
>
> thanks,
> Jay
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Nov 05 2002 - 08:35:47 GMT-3