From: boby2kusa (boby2kusa@hotmail.com)
Date: Sat Apr 24 2004 - 15:18:48 GMT-3
In order for the BGP to consider a route to a particular network viable it
must also be in the routing table, this is where the ">" comes in. If the
172.16.1.0 is not in the routing table the BGP will know about it but it
will not consider it as viable route.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ahmed Mustafa" <ahmed.mustafa@sbcglobal.net>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 11:07 PM
Subject: BGP Aggregation Rule
> I understand that in order for aggregation to work, one of the more
specific
> routes must be in the BGP routing table, not IP routing table.
>
> I believe it only required in BGP routing table. What happens if the more
> specific route is in the BGP table such as
>
> * 172.16.1.0, without a > sign. Without a greater than sign the route is
not
> considered for selection though but will it fulfil the aggregation
> requirements
>
> Regards,
>
> Ahmed
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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 : Mon May 03 2004 - 19:48:54 GMT-3