nanog mailing list archives
Re: AT&T NYC
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch () muada com>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 17:26:54 +0200 (CEST)
On Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Jesper Skriver wrote:
Links and loopbacks => IGP
Why on earth does you want your link addresses in your IGP ?
Sometimes it cannot be avoided, due to bad implementation, but why do you need it ?
Routers that learn a route over IBGP need to know where the next hop address for route from other AS points to. Since this can't be a loopback address and you typically don't run an IGP on subnets between border routers in your AS and a remote AS, you need to either set next-hop-self on all IBGP sessions or redistribute connected in your IGP. Iljitsch van Beijnum
Current thread:
- Re: AT&T NYC bdragon (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC Petri Helenius (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC Stephen J. Wilcox (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC bdragon (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC Clayton Fiske (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC Jesper Skriver (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC Jesper Skriver (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 02)
- Re: AT&T NYC bdragon (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC Iljitsch van Beijnum (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC Stephen J. Wilcox (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC Stephen J. Wilcox (Sep 03)
- Re: AT&T NYC alex (Sep 03)