From: Lloyd Ardoin (Lloyd@TheWizKid.biz)
Date: Tue Aug 26 2008 - 17:26:17 ART
Hi Johnny,
I did this lab just a few days ago and I believe that the links between R6 and
BB1 and R4 and BB3 are not in the included the IGP section so when you peer
via IBGP if you look at the next hop it will be those external links that the
peers don't know about. So your two options would be either to
1) Bring the links into the IGP domain
2) Use the next-hop-self command to advertise a known link to the IBGP peer
HTH,
Lloyd V Ardoin
From: Jonny English
Sent: Tue 8/26/2008 8:37 AM
To: Cisco certification
Subject: Re: IEWB lab 13 task 10.1
Sorry to add to this, but I'm a little confused here.
To add to this, in lab 13 task 10.1, R4 is peering with BB3 which is in AS
54 and R6 is peering with BB1 which is also in AS 54..
On R4 we have neighbor 150.1.6.6 next-hop-self and on R6 we have neighbor
150.1.4.4 next-hop-self..
There an IGP route to R4 and R6's loopback addresses, so why do we need the
next-hop-self command?
Any idea's
Thanks for the help again.
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:43 AM, Jonny English
<redkidneybeans@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> i'm doing lab 13 task 10.1
>
> I need to understand something here,
> say we have
>
> R4------------R5------------R1--------------R3------------------R6
>
> R4 and R6 are in bgp AS 100. I just use the loopbacks of R4 and R6 to form
> an adjacency.
>
> Is it good practice to enable synchronization here, since R5, R1, R3 are
> not in AS 100 and not running BGP?
>
> Thanks for the help
>
-- Thank You,Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Sep 01 2008 - 08:15:32 ART