RE: BGP SoO

Ok, I understand it now, using SoO together as-override. That is a very
clear example/picture.

Thanks both for your help,

One another question,.. as-override works in the incoming direction, isn't?

Regards

-----Mensaje original-----
De: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] En nombre de Kambiz
Agahian
Enviado el: jueves, 15 de julio de 2010 19:17
Para: 4g1vn; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
Asunto: Re: BGP SoO

Well, it depends who you are :) but yes that's pretty much it.

Please see this:
http://fengnet.com/book/MPLS%20Configuration%20on%20Cisco%20IOS%20Software/i
mages/1587051990/graphics/14fig56_alt.gif

But still the critical point is that you clearly understand the difference
between the allowas-in and as-override commands when it comes to designing a
discontinuous BGP network. It's the difference between you can, you want and
you should :) - Being the SP or the customer brings new challenges to this
picture but in order to pass the R&S track don't worry about them.

HTH
Kambiz Agahian

CCIE Instructor/Consultant
CCIE# 25341, CCSI# 33326, MCSE, MCSA

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:09 AM, 4g1vn <shaun.gomez_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Great point Kambiz! So, if a customer is using the same AS number at each
> location and you don't want to break the "normal" BGP loop prevention
> mechanism using override or allowas-in. Use SoO! :)
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Kambiz Agahian
<aussiecert_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Antonio,
>>
>> Let's see the issue from this point of view; what if you have 10 BGP
sites
>> with the same AS number connected back to a provider? (like a Uni with a
>> public AS number and 10 campuses connected to AT&T) what would you do to
>> get
>> things done in terms of normal updates? allowas-in or as-override
>> solutions
>> right? did you notice that you almost killed the native BGP loop
>> prevention
>> mechanism ? :)
>>
>> HTH
>> Kambiz Agahian
>>
>> CCIE Instructor/Consultant
>> CCIE# 25341, CCSI# 33326, MCSE, MCSA
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 8:25 AM, Antonio Saez <
>> antonio.saez.jimenez_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I don't understand the bgp SoO community. Imagine an scenario with two
>> PE
>> > routers speaking VPNv4 iBGP, 2 CE routers speaking iBGP and each PE
>> router
>> > speaking eBGP with on CE router. If one CE router send a prefix to the
>> PE
>> > router, and the Pe router to the other PE, then when the PE would send
>> the
>> > update to the CE, this CE router would discard the prefix because It
>> would
>> > see its AS in the AS Path.
>> >
>> > Please, tell me if I am wrong.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 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
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________________________________
>> > Subscription information may be found at:
>> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> shaun

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Thu Jul 15 2010 - 20:54:36 ART