From: Brian McGahan (bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com)
Date: Mon Dec 15 2003 - 21:25:14 GMT-3
Richard,
This is a valid configuration, however it is typically not required.
A route reflector conforms to the following three rules:
1. if a route is learned from an EBGP peer it is candidate to be advertised
to any neighbor
2. if a route is learned from a client peer it is candidate to be advertised
to all client peers, non-client peers, and EBGP peers.
3. if a route is learned from a non-client peer it is candidate to be
advertised to all client peers and EBGP peers.
(Note the term 'non-client' refers to an iBGP peer not configured with the
route-reflector-client statement)
Therefore assuming that the route reflector is reflecting for its
iBGP peers, the peering between redundant route-reflectors will behave the
same whether they are clients or non-clients of each other.
HTH,
Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593
bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987
Direct: 708-362-1418 (Outside the US and Canada)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Richard Davidson
> Sent: Sunday, December 14, 2003 5:10 PM
> To: groupstudy
> Subject: point a route-reflector-client to a route-reflector-client
>
> Is there amy known problems pointing a
> route-reflector-client to a route-reflector-client?
>
> R1-----R2
> | |
> | |
> R3 R4
> **
> R1
> neighbor R2 route-reflector-client
> !
> R2
> neighbor R1 route-reflector-client
>
>
> =====
> Richard Davidson
> Yahoo IM: r1davidson
> e-mail rich@myhomemail.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
> http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jan 03 2004 - 08:25:41 GMT-3