nanog mailing list archives
Re: redistribution
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2001 14:43:10 -0800
this is getting far more complex than that point warrants. someone said one should not distribute bgp into igp and igp into bgp. i tried a simple example where o there are few non-default routes but they are significant o there are two routers that have external neighbors, at least one of which must be an ebgp speaker and the other may be bgp or default o and there is a third router *in the middle* to which a customer is attached the point is o the router in the middle *must* do dynamic routing, or there will be a routing loop o for many reasons, it is likely the middle router will be an igp, not bgp speaker o hence very careful redistribution of ebgp to igp, and of igp to bgp is useful randy
Current thread:
- [no subject] Zhao, Xingguo (Nov 01)
- Re: Brian (Nov 01)
- Re: your mail Clayton Fiske (Nov 01)
- Re: redistribution Randy Bush (Nov 01)
- Re: redistribution Alex Bligh (Nov 03)
- Re: redistribution Randy Bush (Nov 03)
- Re: redistribution Randy Bush (Nov 03)
- Re: redistribution Chrisy Luke (Nov 03)
- Re: redistribution Alex Bligh (Nov 03)
- Re: redistribution Alex Bligh (Nov 03)
- Re: redistribution Randy Bush (Nov 03)
- Re: redistribution Nipper, Arnold (Nov 03)
- Re: redistribution Randy Bush (Nov 03)
- Re: redistribution Randy Bush (Nov 01)