On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 06:25:30PM +0000, Neil Jerram wrote: > On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 3:03 PM Ondrej Zajicek <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 12:39:43AM +0100, Nico Schottelius wrote: > > > I have had a look at OSPF, but for our relatively simple network it > > > looks like an overkill. Do you have any other recommendations for > > > what to run the IGP with instead? > > > > > > The main reason I so far tried to stay on iBGP only is to reduce > > > complexity. > > > > Well, you can run just IBGP, if you use direct + 'next hop self' options, > > which should be OK in your simple topology. > > > > According to my understanding of the BIRD code, 'next hop self' is only > relevant when exporting a locally originated route to a BGP peer. So, > assuming the original question was about what happens on R1 and R2, I would > not expect it to be relevant at all. Is that right?
Option 'next hop self' is relevant in both exporting locally originated route to a BGP (i.e. a route without existing bgp_next_hop attribute) and exporting route from BGP to another BGP (i.e. a route with existing bgp_next_hop attribute). See bgp_use_next_hop() and bgp_use_gateway() functions and their usage. -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: [email protected]) OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."
