From: Tarun Pahuja (pahujat@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Jun 04 2007 - 15:04:36 ART
John,
Hope this helps.
QCan IBGP be used in place of an IGP (RIP, IGRP, EIGRP, OSPF, or ISIS)?
AYes and no. Remember that the next-hop information from EBGP is carried
into IBGP. If IBGP does not have a route to reach the next hop, then the
route will be discarded. Typically an IGP needs to be used to exchange
routes to the next hop, but this can be achieved by using static routes on
all the routers running IBGP. So, the answer is yes if you want to use and
maintain static routes. Otherwise, the answer is no.
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/cisintwk/ito_doc/bgp.htm
Thanks,
Tarun Pahuja
CCIE#7707(R&S,Security,SP,Voice,Storage),CCSI
On 6/4/07, John Gibson <johngibson1541@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Am looking at univercd's "Technology Handbook", and
> the question is slightly different - asking to use
> iBGP in stead of general BGP. And
> their answer says nexthop is carried from external
> AS, so, unless you use static route, the nexthop
> will most likely unreachable.
>
> My solutions,
>
> 1. We don't need static route if every iBGP router
> does "neighbor ... next-hop-self"
>
> 2. If we don't use "neighbor ... next-hop-self",
> simply run eBGP in every router we have.
> Just let every router in our domain be an AS .
>
> 3. If our share holder is not happy that we spend
> much money for the extra AS registration, just
> use a separate private AS in every router and
> remove private AS's at the real border.
>
> I think there are just many many ways to run BGP
> to replace ALL IGP protocols.
>
> Am I thinking straight ?
>
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Jul 01 2007 - 17:24:46 ART