Re: Regarding Next hop self

From: Raghav Bhargava (raghavbhargava12@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Feb 03 2009 - 05:55:37 ARST

yes in my scenario i will not form neighbor adjacency with ISP
router...But will it work???

thanks
/raghav

On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 11:52 PM, Tolulope Ogunsina <togunsina@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In my opinion, for IGPS, there are a lot of things that can be done.
> The key is ensure there is no neighbor relationship.
> Think Authentication.
>
>
> HTH,
>
> On 2/2/09, Raghav Bhargava <raghavbhargava12@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Experts,
>>
>> Following is the topology:-
>>
>>
>> ISP----------p2p link-----------------------R1----------R2-------------R3
>>
>>
>> R1,R2,R3 are in the same AS.Lets say 100. Now since we don't advertise
>> the point to point link on R1 ( as per the best practices coz
>> otherwise the complete internet routes will be in the routing table of
>> R1 hence causing CPU hike) we will configure next hop self on R1 so
>> that the routers r2 and r3 knows how to go out.
>>
>> My question is can we do something like this--
>>
>> make the interface which is connecting ISP as passive and advertise
>> the point-to-point link in lets say ospf towards R2 and R3. After
>> that remove the next hop self from R1.
>>
>> Will this thing work..
>>
>> Why I am asking this is because I don wanna use Next hop self...Just a
>> weird question..trying to play and learn at the same time.
>> --
>> Warm Regards
>> Raghav
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
>
> Tolulope.
> 

-- 
Warm Regards
Raghav

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Mar 01 2009 - 09:44:09 ARST