From: Jason Cash (cash2001@swbell.net)
Date: Thu Dec 05 2002 - 11:12:13 GMT-3
I am reading the BGP Case studies on the cisco site:
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/16.html#A24.0
And it states :
"It is normal in an AS to have BGP speakers that do not understand the
concept of route reflectors. We will call these routers conventional BGP
speakers. The route reflector scheme will allow such conventional BGP
speakers to coexist. These routers could be either members of a client
group or a non-client group. This would allow easy and gradual migration
from the current IBGP model to the route reflector model. One could
start creating clusters by configuring a single router as RR and making
other RRs and their clients normal IBGP peers. Then more clusters could
be created gradually.
It then shows a diagram and then states:
"In the above diagram, RTD, RTE and RTF have the concept of route
reflection. RTC, RTA and RTB are what we call conventional routers and
cannot be configured as RRs."
My question is this.for what reason would a router not be able to be
configured as a Route Reflector. Is route reflection a Cisco
proprietary feature or am I just reading this wrong. Searching on the
site, I see the commands was available from IOS 11.1.
What exactly would define a conventional router?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jan 17 2003 - 17:21:39 GMT-3