From: dburnett (dburnett@click1.net)
Date: Thu Oct 17 2002 - 11:27:34 GMT-3
ebgp-multihop is only necessary with EBGP peers. IBGP do not require the
multihop command, regardless of whether or not you are using a loopback
interface as the peer IP....See Halabi (2nd ed.) chapter 6.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Fletcher" <tim@fletchmail.net>
To: "Paglia, John (USPC.PCT.Hopewell)" <JPaglia@NA2.US.ML.com>
Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: EBGP Multihop's necessity with loopback addresses
> I don't think the issue is the update source, but the destination. If your
> destination is a loopback, then it will be 2 hops away and require the
> multihop statement.
>
> -tim
>
> On Wed, 16 Oct 2002, Paglia, John (USPC.PCT.Hopewell) wrote:
>
> > I recently heard that if you are establishing your BGP neighbors using
> > 'update source loopback 0', you should also use the 'ebgp-mu' cmd, even
if
> > the neighbors are directly connected...the reason being that your
loopback
> > is NOT directly connected to the neighbor. However, in my experiments I
have
> > never done this for neighbors that are directly connected, yet have
> > established peerings successfully.
> >
> > Is there validity to this statement, and if so, under which
circumstances is
> > it absolutely vital, other than the 'non-physically or nbma topology'
> > scenarios??? Something tells me that this may be an older IOS issue or
> > something like that.
> >
> > John
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Nov 05 2002 - 08:35:49 GMT-3