From: Michael Zuo (mzuo@ixiacom.com)
Date: Tue Sep 12 2006 - 01:35:37 ART
I have a stupid question:
What is the difference between "maximum-paths" and "maximumn-paths
ibgp"?
I know the first one is protocol independent, other than that, are they
equivalent?
Thanks :)
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Ivan
Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2006 7:42 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com; 2nd CCIE
Subject: Re: BGP maximum paths
This command was integrated in IOS 12.2(28)SB
check thik link:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios124/124tcr/t
irp_r/rtebght2.htm#wp1111400
On Saturday 02 September 2006 17:46, 2nd CCIE wrote:
> Hi Folks ;
> I know this has been for discussion recently ..but im not able to
reach
> the solution from the archive ..so here we go --------R2 -------|
> R1------| R4
> -----------R3------|
>
> R1,R2,R3 are on same AS 10 , R4 on AS 20
>
> R4 advertises the lo1 netw (10.1.1.1/24) to both R2 and R3 via ebgp
>
> R2 and R3 send the network to R1 via ibgp
>
> what i want to achieve is that R1 load balance the traffic to R4
across
> both R2 and R3
>
>
> I can see the network 10.1.1.1 on the bgp table twice , however on
the
> routing table is shows only from R2 .
>
> I am using maximum paths 2 on R1 , but i do not have maximum-paths
ibgp
> at all under the bgp process (version 12.2(27))
>
>
> any ideas ?
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messengers low PC-to-Phone call
> rates.
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Oct 01 2006 - 16:55:40 ART