From: yu chunyan (yuchunyan@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Sep 12 2003 - 11:57:50 GMT-3
confederation works here ?
Bin
>From: "Paul Borghese" <pborghese@groupstudy.com>
>Reply-To: "Paul Borghese" <pborghese@groupstudy.com>
>To: "'Kaiser Anwar'" <Kaiser_anwar@hotmail.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: RE: alternative bgp no sync command
>Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 10:50:09 -0400
>
>Redistribute your BGP routes into your IGP protocol. With synchronization
>enabled, BGP will not advertise routes to an EBGP speaker unless that route
>is also known via the IGP protocol.
>
>Take care,
>
>Paul Borghese
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>Kaiser Anwar
>Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 10:18 AM
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: alternative bgp no sync command
>
>Hi Group,
> I have a question about no sync command for bgp.I was doing a
>lab
>with three routers running IBGP. I did not have the No sync command.
> what would be the alternative to No sync for bgp. Thanks
>
>
>Kaiser A
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Oct 01 2003 - 07:24:27 GMT-3