From: John Matus (John.Matus@tokiom.com)
Date: Mon Sep 26 2005 - 15:09:44 GMT-3
ok, to clarify again...................
i was going under the assumption that you do not want R3 to transit R2 to
get the the prefixes on bb1. is that correct? that should be correct
since there would be no reason for bb1 to send traffic to R3 since R3 is
not advertising any routes... yeah?
Regards,
John D. Matus
Technical Support / PAS
Fujitsu Consulting
626-568-7716
John.Matus@tokiom.com
Zouta oxpf
<zouta.oxpf@gmail
.com> To
Sent by: Jens Petter Eikeland
nobody@groupstudy <jenseike@start.no>
.com cc
ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject
09/26/2005 11:04 Re: bgp filtering
AM
Please respond to
Zouta oxpf
<zouta.oxpf@gmail
.com>
Hi Jens,
I suggest advertising AS3 routes (R3) to AS2 (R2) with a community value
of
no-export. As a result AS100 will have no knowledge of AS3 routes, and it
will not attempt to reach those routes via AS2.
Hope this helps
Z.
On 9/26/05, Jens Petter Eikeland <jenseike@start.no> wrote:
>
> Hi group,
>
>
>
> I have this setup :
>
>
>
> R3------R1-------R2-----BB1
>
>
>
>
>
> R3= AS3
>
> R1 and R2=AS 2
>
> BB1=AS100
>
>
>
> R3 is EBGP peering with R1
>
> R1 is IBGP peering with R2
>
> R2 is EBGP peering with BB1
>
>
>
> R3 is receiving a bunch of routes from AS100.
>
> My task is to filter on R3 so that AS2 becom a non-transit AS.. All other
> routes should be accepted.
>
> The filter needs to be on R3
>
>
>
> How to achive this task. Any suggestion.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
> JP
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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 - 14:40:16 GMT-3