The situations where this is most often used are where you are already quashing the meds provided by both peers with your own internal traffic engineering values.
If you were going to do that, a related useful command is "bgp deterministic-med". On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Gunjan GANDHI (BR/EPA) wrote: > MED should not be used under this scenario as both the upstream routes > are from different providers. Unless both providers have agreed upon a > MED benchmark value, it is not wise to use MED for route selection. It > is like comparing oranges with apples. > > Cheers > //Gunjan > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Collins, Richard > (EXT) > Sent: Thursday, 2 August 2007 11:24 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Late night BGP puzzler > > > What about using the command 'bgp always-compare-med' under the bgp > router? > If I understand this command then you can compare MED's between internal > and externally learned routes instead of having 'best route' just going > for external. > > Rich > > >Message: 1 > >Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 11:58:23 -0400 > >From: Jeff Fitzwater <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Late night BGP puzzler > >To: "Metz, E.T. (Eduard)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Cc: [email protected] > >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > >I set a MED value for each peer so that I can control which peer is > used > >if they have equal paths. > > > > > >Jeff Fitzwater > >OIT Network Systems > >Princeton University > > > >Metz, E.T. (Eduard) wrote: > >> If I understand correctly, the cost-community is only considered very > > >> late in the decision process (among others after as-path, med and > >> e-bgp/i-bgp): > >> > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a008009 > >> 4431.shtml > >> > >> All these should be equal before the cost-community kicks in.. > >> > >> /Eduard > >> > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Manu Chao > >>> Sent: woensdag 1 augustus 2007 12:38 > >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>> Cc: [email protected] > >>> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Late night BGP puzzler > >>> > >>> eBGP prefer to iBGP > >>> > >>> On 8/1/07, Peter Kranz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> I can't for the life of me figure out why this won't select > >>>> > >>> path #2 as > >>> > >>>> the best path.. can someone unravel what I'm missing.. My > >>>> > >>> goal is to > >>> > >>>> get it to resolve the equal length AS path dispute usin > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > +----------------- H U R R I C A N E - E L E C T R I C -----------------+ | Mike Leber Wholesale IPv4 and IPv6 Transit 510 580 4100 | | Hurricane Electric Web Hosting Colocation AS6939 | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://he.net | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
