From: ccie2be (ccie2be@nyc.rr.com)
Date: Tue May 03 2005 - 12:13:07 GMT-3
Hey George,
Thanks for that link. I missed that one.
Did you notice that not only does the update-source command have to be used
but that a route-map must also be configured where the next-hop is set?
I think if giving a the choice, I'll stick with using the global or site
local address.
Thanks again, Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: George Cassels (gcassels) [mailto:gcassels@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 10:20 AM
To: ccie2be
Subject: RE: BGP and ipv6
Tim,
Check out the link below and look under peering with link local.
You can peer with either the link local, site local or global, but if
you use the link local you have to use the update-source command to
specify which interface the link local address is associated with.
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios123/123cgcr/
ipv6_c/sa_bgpv6.htm#wp1037072
George
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
ccie2be
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 4:29 PM
To: Group Study
Subject: BGP and ipv6
Hi guys,
In the Cisco documentation, the examples I've seen DON'T use the link
local when configuring directly connected bgp neighbors. They use global
or site-local addresses.
But, if I remember correctly, link local addresses must be used with the
neighbor command in ipv6 IGP's. Is this correct?
So, I'm wondering, with BGP can directly connected neighbors be
specified using link-local addresses?
I'm still getting up to speed with ipv6 and except for static map
statements over f/r or atm, I'm never quite sure when I should be using
the link local address.
If someone can help clarify this, I'd be very grateful.
TIA, Tim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 03 2005 - 10:11:56 GMT-3