Re: Split Horizon

R.B,

I would just clean that up a little and replace "packet" with
"destination" or something along that line.

People sometimes (recently) use this in iBGP discussions, which I
believe to be a slightly improper application of the term. The full
mesh/synchronization requirement has as much if not more to do with
serving as an anti-blackholing mechanism vs. preventing loops from
forming. And even to the extent that it does prevent loops, it does
so slightly differently as contrasted to, say, RIP split-horizon, so
this is not a term that I personally use in the context of BGP.
Others do, though, and so this is probably one context worth making
note of.

The term has also been borrowed for split-horizon DNS and so forth.
But it generally infers a behavior where otherwise flooded information
is not reflected back towards its point of origin relative to any
given point in a topology.

What was the catalyst for your question?

Regards,

Scott

On Apr 23, 2009, at 7:03 , Robin Betterley wrote:

> Hi GS,
>
> The basic principle is simple: Information about the routing for a
> particular packet is never sent back in the direction from which it
> was received.
>
> Is there any other known principle of split horizon?
>
> Cheers,
> R.B
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Thu Apr 23 2009 - 15:43:38 ART