Re: access-list

From: Paul Cosgrove (paul.cosgrove@heanet.ie)
Date: Fri May 16 2008 - 08:04:44 ART

Hi Sadiq,

Taking about sender and receiver may be a little confusing in relation
to a BGP peering. People may think about the sending of routing
information, rather than simply the TCP session establishment process.

What you have said is correct in relation to session establishment, but
it is worth pointing out that it has no effect on subsequent transfers
of routing updates. As Scott mentioned, only one TCP session between
the peers is required to communicate routing updates sent in either
direction. Either peer can be a 'sender' in that sense.

Paul.

Sadiq Yakasai wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> Just a little observation to what you said (prolly just typo);
>
> "BGP is a little funny in this way - the sender sources traffic from TCP port
> 179 - but the destination port is random."
>
> Its actually the other way round; the sender sources the traffic from
> a random port and the destination port is 179. And for the return
> traffic (response), the destination would be a randon port while the
> source would be 179.
>
> HTH
>
> Sadiq
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
> 

-- 
HEAnet Limited
Ireland's Education & Research Network
5 George's Dock, IFSC, Dublin 1, Ireland
Tel:  +353.1.6609040
Web:  http://www.heanet.ie
Company registered in Ireland: 275301

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jun 02 2008 - 06:59:16 ART