From: Niche (jackyliu419@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Sep 20 2005 - 06:54:18 GMT-3
Yes, you can make R1 as a route-reflector for sw1. And in fact, if my memory
still serve, and please someone point out if I am wrong..
If you don't set R1 as route-reflector for sw1 (which I assume sw is alot
inside the same AS), sw1 won't receive the route from R1.
It's because if you only set R1 as a route-reflector-client of R5, all R5
route will only advertise 1 more hope further into the local AS if that
receiver is a same AS RR-client. But I can't 100% confirm this..
Another solution will be make R1 become a normal iBGP peer to R5.
Cheers~
Jacky
On 9/20/05, Jens Petter Eikeland <jenseike@start.no> wrote:
>
> Hi group..
>
>
>
> I am trying to get something to wor, bu tare unsure of what exactly to
> do..
> This is the toplology :
>
>
>
> Switch1--------r1--------r5-----------r2
>
> |
>
> |
>
> R4
>
>
>
> R1, r2,r4 and r5 is in a frame-relay nbma network. All the routers form a
> single AS. I would guess that the normal thing here would be to
> set r5 as route-reflector. But Switch 1 have to been reach from the
> network
> by using bgp only.. so my question is. If I make r5 RR for r1, r2
> and r4. Can I also then make r1 as route-reflector for switch1. Would this
> be a scenario that is good to configure, or is there some other solution
> that would be a better solution..
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Jens P
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Oct 02 2005 - 14:40:15 GMT-3