From: Djerk Geurts (djerk@djerk.nl)
Date: Sat Aug 04 2007 - 16:32:06 ART
As a twist, say one is supposed to filter received routes so a few routers
do not have full visibility anymore. And the question doed not state that
this is ok (intentional, as it conflicts the ful connectivity 'directive').
But BGP could reinstate connectivity...
My take on the matter is: If in doubt check whether you've not missed
anything and ask the proctor. (And don't ask open questions)
But what is the general take here? Should IGP provide full connectivity and
is BGP a bolt on (EGP only). Or is iBGP a valid substitute for the 'lacking'
'IGP' route distribution...
Djerk
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
> Behalf Of Toh Soon, Lim
> Sent: zaterdag 4 augustus 2007 10:24
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Is BGP full connectivity required?
>
> Hi All,
>
> Say, at the beginning of the lab it is stated that upon
> completion of this
> lab you should have full IP connectivity.
>
> I take it to mean full connectivity in IGP. Should I also consider
> configuring full connectivity for BGP routes? However, it is
> not mentioned
> explicitly under the BGP section that we need to.
>
> Please advise.
>
>
> Thank you.
>
> B.Rgds,
> Lim TS
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> _________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 01 2007 - 11:32:09 ART