RE: alternative bgp no sync command

From: David F Palma (dfp3@chubb.com)
Date: Fri Sep 12 2003 - 15:59:36 GMT-3


If they were all in there own confederation AS. Say 65001, 65002 and 65003
in IBGP AS 100. Since confederation peers treat each other as EBGP peers,
synchronization is not an issue. Unless I have overlooked something.

Dave

                                                                                                                                  
                      "Paul Borghese"
                      <pborghese@groups To: "'yu chunyan'" <yuchunyan@hotmail.com>, <Kaiser_anwar@hotmail.com>,
                      tudy.com> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
                      Sent by: cc:
                      nobody@groupstudy Subject: RE: alternative bgp no sync command
                      .com
                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                  
                      09/12/2003 01:26
                      PM
                      Please respond to
                      "Paul Borghese"
                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                  

I can not see how confederations would help eliminate a BGP SYNC problem ..
if anything it will exasperate the problem.

Take care,

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: yu chunyan [mailto:yuchunyan@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 10:58 AM
To: pborghese@groupstudy.com; Kaiser_anwar@hotmail.com;
ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: alternative bgp no sync command

confederation works here ?

Bin

>From: "Paul Borghese" <pborghese@groupstudy.com>
>Reply-To: "Paul Borghese" <pborghese@groupstudy.com>
>To: "'Kaiser Anwar'" <Kaiser_anwar@hotmail.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: RE: alternative bgp no sync command
>Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 10:50:09 -0400
>
>Redistribute your BGP routes into your IGP protocol. With synchronization
>enabled, BGP will not advertise routes to an EBGP speaker unless that
route
>is also known via the IGP protocol.
>
>Take care,
>
>Paul Borghese
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>Kaiser Anwar
>Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 10:18 AM
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: alternative bgp no sync command
>
>Hi Group,
> I have a question about no sync command for bgp.I was doing a
>lab
>with three routers running IBGP. I did not have the No sync command.
> what would be the alternative to No sync for bgp. Thanks
>
>
>Kaiser A
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
>
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Oct 01 2003 - 07:24:27 GMT-3