Re: BGP

From: Faryar Zabihi \(fzabihi\) (fzabihi@cisco.com)
Date: Fri Jun 16 2006 - 16:50:51 ART

• Next message: Darby Weaver: "Re: OT: Congratulations"
• Previous message: Pierre-Alex: "OT: Congratulations"
• Maybe in reply to: Sami: "BGP"
• Next in thread: Joe Rinehart: "RE: BGP"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Becareful with peering to loopbacks because usually you have multiple routes
to the loopback and the underlying igp will load balance. You can lose
serious points

 -----Original Message-----
From: Petr Lapukhov [mailto:petr@internetworkexpert.com]
Sent: Fri Jun 16 15:12:42 2006
To: Sami
Cc: Elias Chari; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: BGP

Sami,

There is no "best" way to configure BGP peerings ;) "Generally", IBGP
links are established with Loopbacks (no single-hop restriction here),
and eBGP with physical interfaces

(but note the "disable-connected-check" option with eBGP, that is designed
specifically for "Loopback" eBGP peering ;)

You may choose any way you find reasonable, and satisfying requirements
of the task (e.g. redundancy, load-balancing, etc).

I just recommend you to be consistent here, not to mess the things :)

With real lab, you should carefully check restrictions and wording, to
deduce the way of peering. If there is nothing that points out to specific
stuff, you may use whatever you prefer :)

HTH

--
Petr Lapukhov, CCIE #16379
petr@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/

• Next message: Darby Weaver: "Re: OT: Congratulations"
• Previous message: Pierre-Alex: "OT: Congratulations"
• Maybe in reply to: Sami: "BGP"
• Next in thread: Joe Rinehart: "RE: BGP"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 01 2006 - 07:57:33 ART