From: Brian McGahan (bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com)
Date: Fri Apr 29 2005 - 13:03:34 GMT-3
Amran,
No this is not what you would want. BGP basically has two jobs,
to report a prefix and its associated next-hop value. While a route may
be learned via BGP the traffic to the destination is actually routed via
IGP. This is because all BGP learned routes must recurse to IGP learned
next-hop values. While technically you *could* design a situation where
it would work it would involve a lot of manual next-hop modification.
Try setting up a network of multiple BGP ASs without using IGP
as an underlying transport and see what happens.
HTH,
Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593
bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987 x 705
Outside US: 775-826-4344 x 705
24/7 Support: http://forum.internetworkexpert.com
Live Chat: http://www.internetworkexpert.com/chat/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> Amran A
> Sent: Friday, April 29, 2005 5:06 AM
> To: Group Study
> Subject: IGP or iBGP/IGP
>
> Guys
>
> All the usual reading material (Doyle, Solie, CCO etc) reccomend to
use an
> IGP along with iBGP within a transit AS. However it seems
> possible to use only iBGP (no IGP).
>
> Is it possible/feasible only to use iBGP. I know its not reccomended
> in real life sceanrios but don't quite know why! Route reflectors take
> care of the asssociated admin there would be with a full mesh, and the
> timers can be tweaked to make it response faster, so why not use only
> iBGP?
>
> -A
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue May 03 2005 - 07:55:10 GMT-3