Re: BGP Confederation

From: k c (jwongccie@yahoo.com.hk)
Date: Sat Feb 12 2005 - 07:12:29 GMT-3


Hi Group,
 
One more question:
On router R4
*> 22.1.1.0/24 150.100.2.254 0 0 2 i
On router R2
*> 22.1.1.0/24 150.100.2.254 0 100 0 (65012) 2 i

On router R5
*>i22.1.1.0/24 150.100.2.254 0 100 0 (65012) 2 i
* 192.3.2.254 0 100 0 (65013) 2 i
On router R6
* 22.1.1.0/24 150.100.2.254 0 100 0 (65011 65012) 2 i
*> 192.3.2.254 0 0 2 i
 
The reason for Router 2 doesn't show up the bgp route with 192.3.2.254 as next hop is: R5 withdraw the route since it has chosen the best route with next-hop 150.100.2.254 and won't announce the other one to R2.
Am I correct?

Thanks

k c <jwongccie@yahoo.com.hk> wrote:
Hi Group,

Here is the test scenario:

BB2(AS2) - R4 (AS65012) - R2 (AS65011) - R5 (AS65011) - R6 (AS65013) - BB1(AS2)
R4,R2,R5&R6 belongs to AS1
I would like to confirm whether
- Should R4 include AS65013 (R4 has bgp connection to R2, not R6) in " bgp confederation peers" command?
- Should R2 include AS65013 (no bgp connection between R2 and R6)?
- Should R6 include AS65012?

From Cisco BGP Case Study, the answer is yes. But in CCBootCamp answer, the ans is No. Which one should be correct?

Thanks.

---------------------------------
7s&~D@1f2D$@&l : 'd(l$M=t$H



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Mar 03 2005 - 08:51:20 GMT-3