From: cebuano (cebu2ccie@cox.net)
Date: Thu Jan 16 2003 - 04:24:14 GMT-3
Peng,
I haven't mocked up this lab yet, but based on the configuration,
Zermatt and Moritz are learning about AS50, 75 and 100 via their eBGP
peers as well so BGP synchronization should have not effect on these
routers' path selection. I'll let you know after I've mocked this up.
Gotta sign off now.
Elmer
-----Original Message-----
From: Peng Zheng [mailto:zpnist@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 2:07 AM
To: cebuano; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: BGP synchronization
I know the path is prefered. But because
synchronization are not disabled on Zermatt and
Moritz, the route learned only from IBGP should not be
put in routing table if it is not learned by IGP.
Right?
--- cebuano <cebu2ccie@cox.net> wrote:
> Peng,
> Check the LOCAL_PREF values for both iBGP routers.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Peng Zheng
> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 11:56 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: BGP synchronization
>
> Hi,
>
> On page 242-244 of Routing TCPIP V2, why Zermatt use
> Moritz to 172.18.0.0?
>
> I think it's not synchronized because it's not
> learned
> by IGP.
>
> Any idea?
>
> Thanks for help.
>
> Best Wishes,
> Peng Zheng
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up
> now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
> .
> .
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Feb 01 2003 - 07:33:50 GMT-3