From: Jeff Mullan (jmullan78@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Mar 13 2007 - 17:45:30 ART
Thanks Narbik !!
On 3/13/07, Narbik Kocharians <narbikk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If the task states that "R2 should NOT advertise it to ANY OF IT'S PEERS",
> any of it's peer means potential IBGP and EBGP peers, so i would go with
> no-advertise.
>
> On 3/13/07, Jeff Mullan <jmullan78@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Folks,
> > If I have a scenario like this :
> >
> > R1--R2--R3
> >
> > R1 AS 100
> > R2 AS 200
> > R3 AS 300
> >
> > R1s loopback say, 1.1.1.1/24 is being advertised via BGP to R2. If the
> > task
> > says " make sure R2 doesnt advertise it to any of its peer and make this
> > change on R1" we will go ahead and set community to this route on R1. My
> >
> > question is, here, on R1 both no-export/no-advertise will do the trick.
> > However, since there are no iBGP neigbours peering with R1, no-export
> > will
> > do the best solution. What do you guys think from exam perspective ?
> > Will I
> > loose points using no-advertise here ?
> >
> > Please note, task says " R1 should not advertise this to ANY PEER " but
> > then
> > we dont have any iBGP peers too .
> > Thanks,
> > -JM
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Narbik Kocharians
> CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security)
> CCSI# 30832
> Network Learning, Inc. (CCIE class Instructor)
> www.ccbootcamp.com (CCIE Training)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 01 2007 - 06:35:51 ART