From: Darby Weaver (darbyweaver@yahoo.com)
Date: Sun Dec 16 2007 - 12:31:25 ART
Interesting question and interesting wording for the
interesting question.
To safely remark on such a cunningly crafted question,
I can only say that one must read the task
word-for-word, using one's finger to ensure that not a
single word is missed or forgotten and then be
prepared to provide a well-proposed answer to such a
cunningly written, well-crafted interesting question.
--- CCIEin2006 <ciscocciein2006@gmail.com> wrote:
> Lets say you have two AS's connected via non-BGP
> speaking routers like this:
>
> R1 <--AS1
> / \
> R2 R3 <-- Non-BGP
> | |
> R4--R5 <--AS2
>
> Task states to configure AS2 to influence AS1 to
> prefer the BGP path to R4
> for certain networks and R5 for other networks.
> I know there are many ways to do this i.e MED, AS
> path prepend, summary,
> filter, etc..
>
> My question is it enough for AS1 to see the correct
> path in the BGP table or
> do you need to take steps to ensure the non-bgp
> speakers are taking that
> preferred path as well? I already have BGP
> redistributing into IGP so R2 and
> R3 have the routes in their routing table, I'm just
> not sure if I should
> waste time tweaking metrics to force them to route
> via that same preferred
> path?
>
> Would the graders be so anal to make sure each
> router in the path was
> following the preferred path or would they simply
> check the BGP table on AS1
> to make sure the path was preferred there?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Nick
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jan 01 2008 - 12:04:30 ARST