From: Maneesh Chawla (coolmaneesh@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Jan 12 2006 - 06:04:28 GMT-3
I am not sure if we need ACLs and match statement for a route-map. It works
well without them , just that I am not sure of the metrics which will go and
yes , there is a peering with 2.2.2.2 for example 1 , sorry I forgot to
mention.
Thanks
Maneesh
On 1/12/06, n <cisco.wizard@virgin.net> wrote:
>
> Have you been through this paper?
>
> http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/37.html
>
> Where is the match statement and ACL in the config that your route map
> calls?
>
> Looks like 30 for examples 2 and 3.For example 1 you do not say if you
> have
> a peering to 2.2.2.2
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Maneesh Chawla" <coolmaneesh@gmail.com>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 11:56 PM
> Subject: Redistribution
>
>
> > Hi All,
> > I have 3 questions on redistribution,
> > 1. say , I do a
> >
> > router bgp 300
> > redistribute isis metric 10 route-map r1
> > route-map r1 permit 1
> > set metric 20
> >
> > 2. Another case :
> >
> > router bgp 300
> > redistribute isis route-map r1
> > neighbor 2.2.2.2 remote-as 400
> > neighbor 2.2.2.2 route-map r2 out
> > route-map r1 permit 1
> > set metric 20
> > route-map r2 permit 1
> > set metric 30
> >
> > 3. Last case :
> >
> > router bgp 300
> > redistribute isis metric 10 route-map r1
> > neighbor 2.2.2.2 remote-as 400
> > neighbor 2.2.2.2 route-map r2 out
> > route-map r1 permit 1
> > set metric 20
> > route-map r2 permit 1
> > set metric 30
> >
> >
> > Could anyone tell me what will be the MED of the routes going to 2.2.2.2
> .
> >
> > Thanks
> > Maneesh
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Feb 01 2006 - 07:45:48 GMT-3