From: Richard Dumoulin (Richard.Dumoulin@vanco.fr)
Date: Sat Apr 23 2005 - 20:11:56 GMT-3
Yes you are over configuring but I don't think you will loose points for
doing it your way,
-- Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: Vijay Ramcharan [mailto:vramcharan@thedeal.com]
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2005 1:06 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: BGP peering via loopbacks vs physical interfaces
What would be the recommended (as in the lab) way to configure BGP peers
if you are not explicitly instructed to configure the session so that it
stays active even if a physical interface fails?
As I'm going through some practice labs I'm noticing that the solutions
tend not to use loopbacks for peering. They're only used if the
question states that the sessions must stay up even after an interface
failure.
It seems that I'm over-configuring peers by using loopbacks when there's
no need to do so.
Thanks.
Vijay Ramcharan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue May 03 2005 - 07:55:08 GMT-3